Medieval Slavic Lives of Saints and Princes 0930042441, 9780930042448

Citation preview

y*

Medieval Slavic Lives

111unit 11 a11«ii i iu tin' X! i **nl my «*vm

ini Iui u

Medieval Slavic Lives of

Saints and Princes

Marvin Cantor

Ann Arbor

© 1983 by the University o f Michigan All rights reserved

ISBN 0-930042-44-1 This book was set in IBM Press Roman by Kenneth N. Brostrom

MICHIGAN SLAVIC TRANSLATIONS 5

Printed at Braun-Brumfield

Michigan Slavic Publications Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, Michigan

Ladislav Matejka, Managing Editor

The preparation of this volume was made possible in part by a grant from the Program for Translations of the National Endowment for the Humanities, an independent federal agency.

CONTENTS

Introduction

1

The Life of Constantine

23

The Life of Methodius

97

The Life of Wenceslas

139

The Narrative, Passion, and Encomium of Boris and Gleb

163

The Life of Stephen Nemanja

255

IN T R O D U C T IO N

I The advent of Christianity ushered in a new biographical hero, the saint, as classical secular biography yielded to hagio­ graphy. This form of life-writing arose in connection with the persecution of Christians; the first stories were those of martyrs. The earliest examples were simple, unembellished dialogues between the accused and their judges. In time, however, as Christianity became the primary religion in Europe, many “ Lives” were produced; a large number of them were based on legends which had grown up around martyr-saints. As the per­ secution of Christians abated, new saintly heroes appeared: ascetics, church-builders, monks, orators, and so on. But many of their Lives had as little basis in fact as did the passions of their predecessors. Hagiography in time had become a highly conventionalized and stylized kind of biography. It abounded in repetitious themes, commonplaces, and supernatural elements. All of these features combined to produce a work which some critics have viewed as essentially a type of “ anti-biography,” 1 inasmuch as all the basic tenets of historical biography are violated. As a result, the hero of the Life lost his individuality and became a generalized type. Nevertheless, the saint remained virtually the only acceptable subject for life-writing until the time when the prestige of secular rulers began to rival that of Church dignitaries. This was the ninth century, which marked the beginning of an era that once again would appreciate secular achievements and virtues, which in turn would lead to a revival of secular biography and a new phenomenon—biographies that combined elements from the latter and hagiography. It is perhaps not surprising that the first secular biographies of the age of Christianity had as their subjects the secular lumin­ aries Charlemagne in the West (Einhards’ Life o f Charlemagne) and Basil I (the Macedonian) in the East (Life o f Basil by Constantine Porphyrogenitus), and that their Lives were based as much on classical models as they were on the rhetoric of hagiography. The revival of secular learning in the ninth century affected many fields including hagiography, where it also found 1

some expression New features now began to appear in hagio graphical literature. In his discussion of Byzant ine lilt rature, Paul J. Alexander notes, for instance, t h a t the Life of Nicepliorus did not contain a single miracle performed by the saint; that many Lives written during this period record that the saint was instructed in secular knowledge; and that there appeared a biographical encomium with a secular hero.2 Thus, works like these provided the links between hagiography and secular biography which would result in a series of literary productions of mixed genre. With regard to Medieval Slavic literature, it can be said that at its very inception a secular trend asserted itself in biographical writing. The dawn of Slavic literacy occured in the ninth cen­ tury, and Slavic biography from the outset fell under the influ­ ence of the general intellectual and cultural climate of that era. In the words of Harold Nicolson, “ No branch of literature has been more senstive than biography to the ‘spirit of the age.’ ” 3 Clear evidence of this “ spirit” is to be found in the first bio­ graphical works written in Slavic, the Pannonian Lives of Constantine the Philosopher and his brother Methodius. Though the Life of Constantine is clearly modeled on Byzantine saints’ Lives and contains much of the attendant rhetoric of hagio­ graphy, the hero is a “ philosopher” who had studied “ all the Hellenic arts,” and an emissary extraordinaire for the Byzantine Empire. The Life o f Methodius informs us that the hero was for many years the governor (archon) of a Slavic province. Subse­ quently the brothers were indeed canonized and immortalized as the Apostles to the Slavs. However, from a literary point of view their Lives are not conventional hagiographies, nor are they pure secular biographies; they fall between the two, and are works of a mixed genre which, in my opinion, can be con­ sidered semi-secular biography. It is obvious from the foregoing that a “ semi-secular biography” is understood here as a mixed genre falling between the traditional genres of hagiography and secular biography. In the simplest of terms, a work can be considered in part secular if at least some emphasis is placed on the hero’s worldly achieve­ ments. A biography can be viewed as the “ history” of a man’s life with the focus on the individual. If the individual is not the focal point, the work ceases to be biography and becomes history. Hagiography, on the other hand, might well focus on the individual, but it purposely ignores his worldly aspect. Since its primary aim is edification within a religious frame of reference, the “ individual” it depicts becomes less an individual

and more the abstract embodiment o f Christian virtues. In addition, one o f the primary essentials o f biography is historical truth. a notion which most often is alien to hagiography. Whereas fairly clear distinctions can be drawn among such classical literary forms as biography, hagiography, and histori­ ography, the distinctions between biographies and encomia (panegyrics) are not always as clear. It is true that their struc­ tures are different: biography normally is a chronological narrative, encomium, an enumeration of qualities arranged in categories of virtues.4 Also, biography tends to present an inte­ grated story, to relate a curriculum vitae-, encomium tends to be fragmentary, presenting often rhetorical flourishes on cer­ tain features of the hero’s character. However, both do treat individuals and do utilize many of the same commonplaces. Moreover, if encomium is expanded to include narrative, it begins to border on biography. Hence it is again possible to find works that fall between distinct genres, which as such consti­ tute a mixed genre that can, on the basis of its emphasis, be characterized as predominantly biographical or predominantly encomiastic. Therefore, since the above-mentioned works mix elements from various genres and contain secular aspects, I have suggested the classification semi-secular biography, which calls attention to this mixture of features. Of course the extent to which particular works fit into this classification may vary; one may be more or less secular or conventionally hagiograph­ ical, or purely biographical and so on, than another. The ninth century was an especially significant era for the Slavs, for during this period Christianity began to penetrate the immense tracts of land occupied by them. A concerted effort to proselytize these pagan inhabitants of Central and Eastern Europe was undertaken in the East and West, as Byzan­ tine and Frankish missionaries began to vie for converts. As a result of this activity the princes of the Moravians, Bohemians, Bulgars, Serbs, Pannonian Croats and Dalmatian Croats were baptized. But the single most important event of this century for the Slavs as a whole was the mission of Constantine-Cyril and Methodius to Moravia in 862/63, the preparation for which brought about the creation of an alphabet for the “ Slavic tongue.” And the creative use of the written tradition that was originated by its ingenious founders led to the composition of the Pannonian Lives. These served as a model for the other works contained herein, the first Slavic Lives: the earliest attempts among individual Slavic nations at biographical writing. In preparing the present volume, the primary consideration

4

was to translate this body of work from Old Church Slavic/Sla­ vonic (henceforth OCS) into English. Though all of these works have been classified as legends and/or hagiographies—given the fact that all the protagonists were eventually canonized—they are nevertheless more correctly considered semi-secular biogra­ phies. For while the protagonists are the subjects of panegyrics and are illuminated by saintly archetypes, they are also secular personalities, and a wealth of factual, historical information is presented. And this is perhaps best exemplified by the Pannonian Lives, the Life o f Constantine and the Life o f Methodius (here­ after LC and LM), which highlight the cultural and religious activity of the brothers and mark the creation of Slavic literature. The works now known as the Pannonian Lives were once also known as the “ Pannonian Legends” and were so considered for a long time. In fact the Polish Slavist Alexander Bruckner found them so fanciful that he consigned their historical worth to the rubbish heap. Although the term “ legend” is this context should be viewed technically, indicating the Life of a saint, it nevertheless seemed to imply the presence of fiction and fantasy—a most unfortunate and misleading suggestion con­ sidering the exceptional historical value of these biographies. For despite the initial scepticism and negative evaluation of their trustworthiness, LC and LM have been vindicated as accurate testimonials of Slavic history, and their authenticity and historical reliability—owing primarily to the pioneering work of Professor Francis Dvornik—are no longer questioned by the vast majority of scholars. The biographies of Constantine-Cyril and Methodius serve as the basic sources for studying the Cyrillo-Methodian era — a crucial period in the rise of Slavic culture and literature. The brothers were born in Thessalonica, where their father served as a high military official. It is not entirely correct to assert that they were Greeks, as has been done in the past. Their parents are more precisely described as Byzantines, since it is difficult to determine the extent to which Thessalonica, a part of the Byzantine Empire, had been Hellenized in the ninth century. Moreover, there are scholars who maintain that their mother was a Slav. What is clear is that the brothers were bilingual, as the Emperor’s words to the brothers in LM testify: “ You are both Thessalonians and all Thessalonians speak pure Slavic.” Constantine displayed extraordinary intellectual powers from childhood: while not yet fifteen, still a pupil in Thessalonica, he was able lo read the most thoughtful o f the Church Fathers. Word of his gifts reached Constantinople, and he was called to

the imperial court to study under the guidance of the best mentors of that day. Methodius, as already indicated, became the governor of a Slavic province, the location of which has been placed in Macedonia around the Strymon River. After forsaking his secular career, he took monastic vows on Mount Olympus. Weak in health, full of religious enthusiasm and love of learning, Constantine was made deacon and became the Patri­ arch’s librarian. His profound erudition allowed him to engage and defeat the iconoclast Patriarch John VII (John Grammaticus) in a debate on the veneration of icons. In the latter part of 850 he assumed the chair of philosophy at the Imperial University and received the title “ Philosopher,” which was to remain with him down through history. When in the following year Byzantium sent a delegation to the reigning Caliph, Al-Mutawakkil, to discuss peace and mitigate the persecution of Christians in the Arab Empire, the Emperor and Patriarch chose Constantine to accompany it. In the ensuing debates with the Arabs on religious questions, he upheld the sublimity of Christian truth and demonstrated the emptiness of Mohammedan doctrine, which, as we read in LC, resulted in an attempt to poison him. After several years spent with his brother Methodius in a monastery on Mount Olympus, in 860 Constantine received a new commission from the Emperor: to travel with an embassy, together with Methodius, to the Khazars, whose Kagan had requested a theologian capable of explaining Christian doctrine. The road to the Khazar Empire lay through Kherson, where the missionaries stopped for the winter and used the time to study Hebrew and the Old Testament, and where they made two discoveries—the Gospels and Psalter written in “ Russian letters” and the relics of St. Clement, Pope of Rome—both of which have caused controversies in various places at different times.5 The Byzantine embassy was well received by the Khazar Kagan and discussions followed, touching upon, among other things, the Trinity and the Incarnation, which Constantine defended by quoting passages from the Old Testament. In 863 the main work of the brothers began. It was then that they were sent, at the request of the Moravian Prince Rostislav (Raslislav), to Moravia in order to give religious in­ struction to the local Slavic population in their own language. Christianity had already been brought to Moravia and Pannonia by Latin missionaries from among the Franks. However, they

6

celebrated the liturgy in Latin and the teachings of the Church were poorly understood. Because of the task that awaited them in Moravia, Constantine was prompted to invent an alphabet for Slavic, and to translate Scripture into Slavic. It seems that he conceived of the whole mission not only in diplomatic terms, but also as an opportunity to spread Christianity in the Slavic language. No one before Constantine had thought to give the Slavs an alphabet and a literary language, and then to teach them to write it by setting an example with the first translations from the Bible. To paraphrase Dostal,6 by doing this Constan­ tine laid the foundation for the litarary activity of the Slavs in the world at large. Adopting the Bulgaro-Macedonain dialect for this purpose, he modeled this literary language on Byzantine Greek syntax and word-formation, using it for the enrichment of vocabulary, and religious and legal terminology. However, his alphabet, Glagolitic (not Cyrillic, which bears his name), was an entirely new invention and showed his keen ability to distinguish and represent the phonological structure of the Slavic language very precisely. He was not only a faithful translator of the Gospels, but a literary artist, and the language (which came to be known as OCS) of his translations was poetic and at times more vivid and plastic than the neutral Greek original. What an incredibly powerful effect it must have had on the Slavs of Moravia when from the East these two mission­ aries came to them bearing books written in Slavic, and in such an impressive style! In Moravia Constantine and Methodius found immediate support from the people and their prince, but were met with unconcealed hostility on the part of the Frankish Catholic clergy. Despite this, they persisted in their work, built churches and established schools, preaching and teaching the liturgy and theology entirely in Slavic. While still in Constantinople, Constan­ tine translated the Gospels and the other books necessary for the Divine Liturgy—the Psalter, Acts, and the Epistles. Trans­ lation activity continued in Moravia, where the brothers trans­ lated the entire Calendar, including the Morning Service, daily Hours, Vespers and Compline, which they taught to the fifty disciples entrusted to them. But it was not long before the Latin clergy leveled the charge of “ trilingual heresy” against them and were busily lodging complaints with Pope Nicholas I. After forty months of intensive work, the brothers set off for Rome in order to resolve several important questions: (1) the establishment of an independent hierarchy for Moravia and Pannonia; (2) the ordination of their disciples; and (3) the

approval of the Slavic liturgy in the Latin Rite. In Rome the Pope was presented with the Slavic translation of the Gospels and other books. As a sign of his approval of the brothers’ work, the new Pope, Hadrian, had several of the Slavic disciples ordained, placed the Slavic books on the altar of the Church of St. Mary and had the liturgy celebrated with them —using the Latin Rite. Toward the end of 868 Constantine’s health was declining rapidly. Realizing that his death was near, he decided to die as a monk and upon initiation into monastic orders took the name Cyril. On the 14th of February 869 he died in Rome and was buried in the Church of St. Clement. Constantine’s premature death at the age of forty-two was a near catastrophe for the Byzantine mission to Moravia and Pannonia. All decisions on such important matters as the appointment of a bishop for Moravia and Pannonia were post­ poned. However, the situation was saved by Kocel, the Prince of Pannonia, who had manifested an interest in the Slavic liturgy and letters and asked the Pope to send back Methodius, “ our teacher.” The opportunity had now presented itself to the Papacy to regain Pannonia. And they decided to send Methodius to the Slavic princes—Kocel of Pannonia, Rostislav of Moravia, and Svatopluk of Nitra (Slovakia)—to explain Rome’s plan to renew papal jurisdiction over these lands and planned recogni­ tion of the Slavic liturgy and letters. With Kocel’s approval in hand, he was soon on his way back to Rome, where he was ordained Archbishop of Pannonia and Moravia. In order to forestall protests on the part of the Frankish hierarchy, the Pope restored the ancient see of Sirmium, which had formally embraced these territories, and Methodius returned to Pannonia toward the end of 869 as Archbishop of Sirmium and Papal Legate. The displeasure of the Frankish bishops—who for the past seventy-five years had been working at the conversion of the Slavs—was felt immediately. They set the Frankish Emperor Louis the German against Methodius. With the political situa­ tion in Moravia in their favor the following year as a result of Svatopluk’s treachery vis-a-vis his uncle Rostislav, Methodius, in Moravia on an official visit, was arrested by Hermanrich, Bishop of Passau, and treated tyrannically. In November 870, the Frankish bishops assembled in Regensburg, formed a synod, and condemned Methodius. He was exiled to Swabia, where he was imprisoned at the Monastery of Ellwangen for two and one-half years.

7

8

In May 873, through the personal intervention of the new Pope John V III, Methodius was again granted freedom. He was escorted to Moravia by a Papal Legate and installed in his office, an act which confirmed Rome’s support of the apostolate of Methodius. But though he was received with honor by Svato­ pulk upon his arrival in Moravia, the relations between them were not at all as cordial as those which Methodius had enjoyed with Rostislav and Kocel; and it was not long before new accusa­ tions arose against him. It seems that Svatopluk, who had sur­ rounded himself with Frankish priests, was not sympathetic toward the Slavic liturgy or letters and himself had initiated complaints to the Pope against Methodius. As a result, Method­ ius once again was summoned to Rome to answer charges of (1) using a forbidden, barbaric tongue to celebrate the Divine Liturgy, and (2) unorthodox teachings, for example, the hyio­ pateric heresy. Appearing before the Pope and the assembled bishops in 880, Methodius vindicated himself of all the accusa­ tions. The outcome of the investigation of him was a weighty Papal Bull, Industriae Tuae, which, in summary, assured Method­ ius’ orthodoxy, confirmed his appointment as Archbishop of Moravia, and approved (without great enthusiasm) the use of the Slavic liturgy, with the stipulation that the Gospel at Mass first be read in Latin. For all this, the adversaries of the Slavic liturgy nevertheless had their satisfaction: the Bull ended by saying (to paraphrase), if Svatopluk and his nobles preferred to hear the Mass in Latin, the Pope commanded that the Mass be offered in Latin. Certain that Methodius would be condemed, Svatopluk’s candidate for the bishopric, Wiching, hastened to Rome to receive his appointment. But it was not to be. And though he managed to be consecrated Bishop of Nitra, he remained antag­ onistic to the arrangement and began immediately to foment trouble. It seems Wiching hurried back to Moravia (Methodius had taken the longer route from Rome so as to avoid Bavarian territory) and, in an attempt to get Svatopluk to reject Method­ ius, spread the rumor that the Pope had condemned and deposed him, and that he had been appointed in his place. The proof he offered was a forged Papal Bull. When Methodius returned to Moravia, he presented the authentic Bull and, upon learning of Wiching’s deception, dispatched a letter to John V III. The Pope’s reply, dated 23 March 881, once again affirmed Method­ ius’ position. Unfortunately, the actual outcome of this contro­ versy is not known because the records have not been preserved. But on the basis of the following line from LM, “ cutting off

all accusations on all sides and stopping the mouths of the garrulous,” some researchers have concluded that Methodius excommunicated his adversaries, including Wiching. Late in 881, Methodius, on the invitation of Emperor Basil I and Patriarch Photius, journeyed to Constantinople, where a warm reception awaited him. They were especially interested to learn of his missionary practices and expressed a lively interest in the Slavic liturgy and letters in view of its success and their desire to convert other Slavs, in particular, the Bulgarians and the Serbs. On his return trip in spring 882, Methodius was accorded an escort of honor to the borders of Moravia. He now set to work on his last great task—a translation of all the Scriptures. Previously Methodius had translated the Nomokanon (best preserved in a thirteenth-century Russian manuscript, Ustjuznaja Kormcaja) and Books o f the Fathers (a form of the Paterikon). Svatopluk’s political power had by now grown considerably. In 883 he invaded Pannonia and later cemented friendly rela­ tions with Bohemia. This opened the way for Methodius and his disciples for new religious “ conquests,” and led to the spread of Christianity beyond the borders of Moravia and Nitra to Bohemia, Silesia, and Poland. Methodius performed his last function on Palm Sunday in the year 885. He died three days later, as he himself had foretold, on the morning of the 6th of April, leaving his disciple Gorazd as his successor and some two hundred Slavic presbyters whom he had trained. The need of the newly-emerging Slavic Christian states to record the Lives of the individuals who initially determined the character of their Christianity and succeeded, directly or in­ directly, in inspiring a sense of national self-awareness led to the creation of national literatures. And these came into being with the Lives of Wenceslas, Prince of the Czechs, Boris and Gleb, Princes of the Russians, and Stephen Nemanja, Prince of the Serbs. The OCS literary tradition, originally centered in the Slavic West—in Moravia, Pannonia, and virtually without interruption until the twelfth century in Bohemia—moved to the Slavic South where it spread to the territories of Bulgaria, Croatia, Macedonia, and Serbia. From Bohemia and from Bulgaria OCS writing radi­ ated into the Slavic East, to Kievan Russia. This interaction is especially well demonstrated by the specific works chosen for translation, which at the same time are representative of the cross-fertilization of a biographical genre that emanated from

9

10

the OCS prototype—the aforementioned Pannonian Lives. It would be difficult to overstate the contribution Constan­ tine-Cyril and Methodius made to Slavic culture. During the ninth century the various Slavic dialects had not as yet diver­ sified to the extent of mutual incomprehensibility. It was not difficult for any Slav to understand the work of the brothers from Thessalonica though presented in a Southern Slavic form. But it is to their credit that they recognized the universality of the Slavic language at that time and intended their work to be utilized in all Slavic-speaking regions. This common Slavic literary language, OCS, justifies calling the literature in this language a common Slavic written tradition. In its earliest stage of development OCS remained relatively free of the influ­ ences of the developing national secular languages, at times so much so that it is hard to localize the language of certain OCS texts. As a result of this intermixture, the cross-pollination of Slavic cultural sources was great. The Cyrillo-Methodian tradition not only tied the Slavs together with a common literary language and literature, it also left an ideological legacy. The Moravian Mission of Con­ stantine-Cyril and Methodius, as Jakobson has stated, professed the equal rights of all peoples and the equal rights of their languages. Since the liturgy symbolized the summit of medieval values, the right to use the native language symbolized the culture’s right to all other values as well.7 The outcome of this precious heritage was that whole cultures became nationalized. The Cyrillo-Methodian ideology granted the emerging Slavic cultures and literatures the right to continue in every sphere of activity. Thus, while this tradition created a common written language and literature for the Slavs which fostered unity, it also contained the potential to allow for the development of separate national cultures and languages. There is hardly any doubt that Bohemia received as much, if not more, of its Christianity in Cyrillo-Methodian form as it did in Latin. Indeed, according to Czech tradition, Prince Borivoj of Prague—the first of the ruling family to become a Christian—was alleged to have been baptized by Methodius himself. Under the protection of his wife Ludmila and grandson Wenceslas, the Slavic liturgy flourished as Slavic priests consoli­ dated their work among the Czech populace. Yet the CyrilloMethodian tradition was not destined to survive in Bohemia. Forming, as it were, a scissors, Bavarians on the one edge and Saxons on the other, the cord that tied Bohemia to its common Slavic written tradition was cut. Bohemia was set adrift in

the midst of a hostile sea, battered on all sides and finally en­ gulfed. The rights granted by its invaluable legacy were abrogated after some two centuries of life. By 1100 the Slavic Church ceased to exist, and Bohemia became a Latin preserve. The tri­ umph of the German-Latin Church was so complete that hardly any Slavic manuscripts survived in Bohemia proper. Those that did survive—mostly fragments—are eloquent testimony, con­ sidering the chances of survival, of the popularity of the works and the extent to which the common Slavic written tradition had penetrated Bohemian life. The actual preservation of the Slavic texts, however, was largely due to their having made their way eastward to Russia and southward to the Dalmatian coast. And a prime example of this is the manuscript of the so-called First OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas. Shortly after he was murdered by his brother Boleslav in 929, Wenceslas began to be venerated as a saint and martyr. Thus he and his grandmother Ludmila (who had been murdered some nine years earlier) were accorded the unique dignity of becoming the first Christian martyrs among the Slavs. The cult of St. Wenceslas soon spread beyond the borders of Bohemia and, after the translation of his relics (932), quickly received ecclesiastical approval. As a result Wenceslas also became the first Slavic sovereign to be canonized. By the close of the tenth century Latin Lives of St. Wenceslas were written in Bavaria, Mantua, and Montecassino. Moreover, a tale of Wence­ slas’ martyrdom was also written in OCS in Bohemia. The anonymous author of this tale is assumed to have been a Slavic priest trained in the Cyrillo-Methodian tradition who was an eyewitness to the events. His work lies at the base of the extant Russian and Croatian copies of it that are known as the First OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas, a work widely recognized as the oldest source of Bohemian history. It is generally believed that this first “ biography” of Wence­ slas—dated around 940—recorded, in a relatively abbreviated form, the principal events of Wenceslas’ youth and reign, con­ centrating on his violent death, the persecution of his followers, the miracle of his blood, and the repentance of his assassin. But the original tenth-century manuscript, which, judging by the evidence of the extant versions, was written in the Glagolitic script, has not been preserved. What we know of it is derived principally from the fourteenth- and fifteen-century Croatian versions, and the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century Russian ones. By the end of the eleventh century the cult of St. Wenceslas

11

12

penetrated into Russia, where Russian ecclesiastical manuscripts recorded a liturgical office for the celebration of the feast of St. Wenceslas (1095), while Russian scribes copied the original Bohemian Life. By this time the cult of St. Wenceslas and the Life had also found their way to the Croatian Glagolites on the Dalmatian coast and islands, who used OCS in the liturgy—a rite similar to that used in Bohemia—and transcribed the Life in their breviaries. Thus was one of the oldest original works of Czech literature preserved. Since in the First OCS Life Wenceslas was referred to as “ Prince” or, more commendably, as “ the good and just, Godworshiping, Christ-loving ruler,” it is obvious that this biography was written not only before his canonization but also before the original Latin Life o f St. Wenceslas by Gumpold (the Bishop of Mantua), the fate of which was in many ways similar to that of this work. Gumpold’s Life o f St. Wenceslas provided the model for an OCS translation by an anonymous author, copies of which came to be known as the Second OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas. This work will be treated in detail in a forthcoming book on Bohemian spirituality. Whereas the First OCS Life is written in a sober, simple style through which the hero is characterized realistically, by direct quotations and virtually without any improvisation, the Second OCS Life has an extraordinarily ornate and complex style, its sentence structure complicated in the extreme, its narrative animated, and its characterization highly improvised. And the influence of the latter work in particular is clearly discernable in the Narrative and Passion and Encomium o f the Holy Martyrs Boris and Gleb, whose martyrdom is explicitly compared with St. Wenceslas. The Cyrillo-Methodian written tradition had by now taken root in Russia, another outgrowth from the shoots that had spread from Bulgaria which were now being further nourished by Bohemia. It would be fallacious to attribute any profund ecclesiastical and/or linguistic significance to Western Cyrillo-Methodian use in Kievan Russia, for, before the cult of St. Wenceslas reached here, the general character of Kievan Christianity had already been shaped under the influence of Byzantium, and Russia had already been exposed to OCS in its Southern Bul­ garian form. This South Slavic written language was so thoroughly to penetrate Russian culture that it would leave an indelible imprint not only on the literary language within and outside of the ecclesiastical field but on spoken and written Russian itself. Yet it would be idle to deny the lively cultural intercourse

between Bohemia and Kievan Russia that resulted from the impact of Czech biography on Old Russian writings. Western, in particular Latin literature, rarely reached Kiev without first undergoing Slavic translation in Bohemia.8 And it was the period of activity of the Sazava Monastery (1032 — 1096/97) that witnessed the main influx of Bohemian mater­ ial into Russia, and the translation to Sazava of part of the relics of SS. Boris and Gleb. However, it was the Lives of St. Ludmila and particularly St. Wenceslas that achieved some popularity, owing in large measure to the parallelism historically between them and St. Olga and SS. Boris and Gleb. Indeed the coincidence of Russian ruler-saints, grandmother and grandson, and the tragedy of Boris and Gleb is striking. The death of Russia’s first Christian prince, Vladimir, in 1015 resulted in a struggle for power among his many sons. Goaded by ambition similar to that of Boleslav, Svjatopolk, in an attempt to wrest control of his father’s princedom from his rivals, had his brothers Boris and Gleb assassinated. Soon after their death in 1015, the brothers began to be worshiped as saints and passion-sufferers. Around 1072 they gained formal recognition by the Greek Church and thereby became the first Russians to be canonized. And it was with the names of Boris and Gleb that the most popular and oldest East Slavic biography is connected. Although the author of the Narrative remains unknown, one can assume that he was acquainted with at least one of the works dealing with St. Wenceslas and, perhaps, with other West Slavic biographical writings. It is not inconceivable that such works as the Lives of St. Ludmila and SS. Constantine-Cyril and Methodius were familiar to the Kievan bookman who composed the work on Boris and Gleb. That a Life of St. Wen­ ceslas was known is confirmed by the direct reference to Wen­ ceslas in the Narrative, and further supported by the striking parallels in theme regarding the miraculous liberation of pri­ soners.9 However, the theme of miraculously freeing prisoners is not only found in the literary tradition of the Czech saint but also in LC, where it was associated with Christ and St. Clement.10 It is of interest to note that liberating prisoners was not one of the miraculous services of either Christ or the Apostles, though in Acts divine aid did come to some of the imprisoned Apostles themselves (cf. Acts 5:18-19; 12:4-10; 16:23-26). Of course it is possible that these passages served as the source for subsequent liberation miracles in Christian legends in general. Yet the parallel between the prisoner miracles

13

14

of St. Wenceslas and SS. Boris and Gleb cannot be explained by this common New Testament source alone. Given the absence of either attested sources, one can only hypothesize about the origin of this theme. Therefore, perhaps it traces its origin to an original OCS composition on St. Wence­ slas which in turn drew its inspiration from LC and was known in Kiev. The model for this theme could not have been solely provided either by Acts, the First or Second OCS Life, nor is it very likely that Kievan men of letters were able to utilize the Latin sources Crescente fide, Christian, Oriente iam sole — which have been given credit for originating this theme. The only other source would be either an OCS translation of another Latin work or an original OCS composition which was later reworked in Latin. I, for one, favor the latter hypothesis.11 The literary production of the Moravian Mission, perpetu­ ated in Bohemia and Bulgaria, was destined for dissemination throughout the Slavic East and South. As a result, all Slavic literary activity during the period under discussion can be considered a continuation of the tradition begun by ConstantineCyril and Methodius and their disciples and followers. Therefore, it is not surprising to find, among other things, a considerable amount of stylistic uniformity and motifs that originate in the earliest monuments and then reappear in later works. And this situation would last as long as OCS prevailed in the literature of the Slavs, for there were no inter-Slavic literary barriers. OCS was the thread binding them with each other and their common heritage, and it remained unbroken virtually up to the twelfth century. Afterwards, OCS gradually yielded to a far less unified Middle Church Slavic. However the unifying role of the OCS tradition would continue to link the Orthodox Slavs. An important and interesting example of this linkage is provided by the last work chosen for translation, St. Sava’s Life o f Stephen Nemanja (St. Simeon). Though a product of the thirteenth century, St. Sava, as Hafner has noted,12 drew on the Pannonian Lives, when introducing his own work, for God’s plan of salvation for man­ kind. Moreover, this was by no means the only way in which the beginnings of Serbian letters touched base, in a manner of speaking, not only with the beginnings of Slavic literacy but also with the other works discussed above. For example, the translatio account of the remains of St. Clement in LC, echoed in a similar account in the work dealing with Boris and Gleb, seems to have exerted influence on St. Sava’s treatment of the relics of Stephen Nemanja. Furthermore, it is possible to view

the political motif found in the Life o f Stephen Nemanja as proceeding from the Slavic biographies of Wenceslas via the works on Boris and Gleb where it appeared as a leitmotif. And this particular drift caused all the biographies under dis­ cussion to combine ecclesiastic and secular elements, that is, to mix purely hagiographic material with a political message. As opposed to Wenceslas and Boris and Gleb, Nemanja lived long enough to designate his successor, abdicate volun­ tarily, and withdraw at a ripe age into monastic life (1195 — 1197). As the monk Simeon, he together with his son Rastko (St. Sava) founded the Serbian monastery of Hilandar at Mt. Athos where he died in the year 1200. From the time his relics were brought back to Serbia, to the Studenica Monastery (1207/08), they were reputed to have miracle-working powers, and shortly thereafter he was canonized. Thus he became the first saint in the autocephalous Serbian Orthodox Church when it was established in 1219. And it was the realization of an autocephalous church that precipitated the emergence of ori­ ginal Serbian literature. Just as the introduction of the cult of SS. Boris and Gleb was a precursor to the ecclesiastical independence of the Russian Orthodox Church, so did the promotion of the cult of St. Simeon precede the ecclesiastical independence of the Serbian Orthodox Church. And the medium which was utilized for this purpose was biography. By infusing his hero with attri­ butes that would complement his religious aspirations and political interests, St. Sava’s biography of his father blended into an integrated whole elements from the conventional genre of hagiography with those of historiography, monastic legend, family tradition, and so on, and thus gave rise to a type of life-writing the development of which was unique in Church Slavic literature. For whereas life-writing was a sporadic phe­ nomenon among the Moravians, Czechs, and Russians, among the Serbs it developed into a separate, unified literary genre which gradually took on an even more secular orientation. Indeed, it was in this area, in the genre of biography, that Serbia made its outstanding contribution to Medieval Slavic literature. As Birnbaum aptly observed, one can hardly speak of an autonomous genre of secular biography independent of hagiography in Old Russian literature. Also in medieval Bohemia life-writing was practiced far too short a time to yield a new genre of biography by blending hagiographic and historiographic elements. The elaboration of this integrated literary genre was accomplished only in Serbia.13 Thus, St. Sava’s Life o f Stephen

15

16

Nemanja was followed by two more Lives of Nemanja which in turn were followed by a series of Lives of St. Sava, and they by the Lives of Serbian kings. Through a quirk of history, it was the suppression of the OCS liturgy in one region of Slavdom that led to its spread to and establishment in other Slavic regions. After the expulsion of the Slavic clergy from Moravia and Pannonia, the disciples and followers of the Apostles to the Slavs were forced to seek refuge elsewhere. They found it in Bulgaria and Bohemia, where fertile ground was provided for the transplantation of this liturgy and the growth of letters. Here they flourished and yielded a harvest that nurtured Russia and Serbia, where the OCS tradition was completely absorbed. Thus, OCS created a literary-linguistic cohesiveness among the Slavs that would never again recur. And, ironically, perhaps it was the very liturgy that was suppressed, the liturgy in the vernacular-the artis­ tically uncreative use of OCS—more than any other single fac­ tor that prolonged Slavic linguistic unity. For there was no dissolution of linguistic unity; it has survived among the Ortho­ dox Slavs and in the Glagolitic liturgical texts of the Croats, despite subsequent incursions by Tatar, Turk, and Teuton, even to this day. However, the end of the OCS period—that is, the end of the artistically creative use of OCS—coincides with the beginning of the end of Slavic linguistic unity in the broader sense of the term. It was about the time of the First Crusade. The Slavic Church, as mentioned above, and OCS literature disappeared in the Slavic West. Just as previously this literature had come to an abrupt end in Moravia and Pannonia, so it did now in Bohemia. It fell to the Slavic East and South to maintain linguistic unity and the OCS tradition. This was accomplished by the Orthodox Slavs, who would re­ main linked for many centuries by the Church Slavic literary language in spite of the process which gradually changed the various Slavic dialects into separate languages. Therefore, it is difficult to establish the terminal point of this unity. Whereas the beginning of OCS literature dates from the Moravian Mis­ sion, and the beginning of the dissolution of “ Pan”-Slavic unity dates from the time this literature ceased to be productive in the Slavic West, no such specific event marks the end of the Church Slavic literary tradition among the Slavic Orthodox. Generally speaking, however, the work of Constantine-Cyril and Methodius was continued for over eight centuries, for the Church Slavic literary tradition in the Slavic Orthodox world was still productive at the end of the seventeenth century. And

in many ways the overall contribution of Constantine-Cyril and Methodius to Slavic culture in general remains influential even down to the present day.

II The present translation of LC and LM is my revised version of these works, which were previously translated by Dr. Richard S. White and myself, and published as a separate volume entitled The Vita o f Constantine and The Vita o f Methodius, Michigan Slavic Materials no. 13 (Ann Arbor: Univ. of Michigan Dept, of Slavic Languages and Literatures, 1976). This book contained an Introduction written by Antonin Dostal. In undertaking the revision, my first concern was to correct errors and shortcomings which I myself had noticed and those which were brought to my attention by colleagues and critics. To date most of the criticism has been favorable, indeed much more so than I dared to hope. For this reason the current version does not differ substantially from the original one. However, it does take into account criticism and recent research in the area, and thus profits greatly therefrom. At least some of the more painful lapses have been rectified. I do regret that my close friend and collaborator Dr. White was unable to work with me on this occasion. There are approximately thirty extant manuscripts of LC which can be divided into two groups, one South Slavic and the other East Slavic. The one chosen for translation is from the former group and is known as the Vladislav Grammaticus manuscript, dated 1469. It was chosen because it is preserved in remarkably complete form and thus avoids the problems connected with recensions. LM has come down to us in only eight manuscripts, all of which are of East Slavic origin. The manuscript found in the Uspenskij sbornik, which dates from the late twelfth or early thirteenth century, was utilized in this translation. Most scholars agree that both Lives were written in Moravia 14 shortly after the death of their respective pro­ tagonists, but the individual authorships still remain an open question. LC has been attributed now to Methodius, now to Clement, LM has been credited now to one of their disciples, now to Naum specifically. One thing is clear: the Lives are the work of at least two different Slavic authors. And what is most remarkable, whoever the authors, is the high quality of their literary output in a language that was formed in a short period

17

18

of time primarily in the process of translating the Bible from Byzantine Greek. Perhaps this is why the stylistic model for these works appears to be the New Testament, in particular the Gospels, which are also laconic and at times elliptical. Yet it is nevertheless a paradox, as Sevcenko has noted, that the peak achievements of OCS literature stand at its difficult beginnings and not at the end of a leisurely development.15 The First OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas, the original Czech copy of which is no longer extant, was written, as indicated above, during the tenth century. However, because of the popu­ larity of the saint, copies of his Life were made in the eleventh century by both Russian and Croatian clerics. As a result there exist two Russian copies representing one common archetype, and three Croatian copies, which also represent a common archetype. Despite this, reconstruction of the original text would have been exceedingly difficult were it not for the existence of a fragmentary version of the original Life, found in the Russian calendar of martyrs—or the Prologue—which had an entry describing the translation of St. Wenceslas’ relics. This ver­ sion facilitated the task of reconstruction, which was most recently accomplished by the eminent Slavist Roman Jakobson.16 His study showed conclusively that the Prologue used “ long and for the most part literal quotations” from the original Czech Life of Saint Wenceslas, and that it developed independently from the other Russian versions and, perhaps, even directly from the Czech original. Jakobson now compared the extant copies of the Life with his reconstructed text and noted the number of deviations shown in each of the variants. Thus, he found that one of the Russian copies, the so-called Vostokov Variant of the First OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas, least deviated syntactically, grammatically, and semantically from his posited original. Therefore, I have chosen this particular variant for translation because, as Jakobson has demonstrated, it is essen­ tially a Cyrillic copy of the original Glagolitic Czech Life with only minor stylistic changes. For the sake of objectivity, it should be noted that Milos Weingart also made an extensive study of the various manuscripts of the First OCS Life o f Saint Wenceslas and obtained com­ pletely different results. He concluded that the text found in the Croatian Glagolitic breviaries was the one that most resembled the lost tenth-century original.17 There is a rather lengthy and to date unresolved controversy as to which of the works dealing with Boris and Gleb, the Nar­ rative and Passion and Encomium o f the Holy Martyrs Boris and

Gleb, the Lection on the Life and Assassination o f the Blessed Passion-Sufferers Boris and Gleb or the account in the Russian Primary Chronicle, served as the basic source for the others. Summarized briefly, the theories and/or hypotheses are as follows. The majority of scholars who have worked on this problem believe that the account in the Primary Chronicle (Povest ’ vremennykh let) underlies both the Narrative (Skazanie) and the Lection (Ctenie). However, there is a hypothesis accord­ ing to which the Narrative predates the account in the Primary Chronicle. As concerns the relation between the Narrative and the Lection, there are also basically differing points of view. On the one hand there are those who believe that the Narrative was written by an anonymous author in the mid-eleventh cen­ tu ry —during the last years in the reign of Jaroslav the Wise (1036—1054)—and that the enumeration of miracles was appended at a later date, around 1089—1115. On the other hand there is the view that the Lection, including the miracles, was written by Nestor—a monk from the Caves Monastery in Kiev—sometime between 1080—1090, and that it as well as the Primary Chronicle served as the sources for the Narrative, which was written sometime after 1115. Given the number of extant manuscripts, the work which apparently appealed most to the ancient Russian reading public was the Narrative, the oldest copy of which was preserved in the Uspenskij sbornik. Compared to the Lection, the Narrative is not nearly as conventionally hagiographic and for this reason does not contain many of the traditional motifs and common­ places of this genre. On the contrary, it is quite dramatic, and in the depiction of the emotional experiences of the heroes conveys a great deal of pathos. It is this manuscript, with the exception of two sections enclosed in brackets, that was chosen for translation. With regard to the Life o f Stephen Nemanja, it is interesting that Sava refers to his hero as “ venerable” and not as “ saint” as does his older brother Stephen the First-Crowned, in his Life of his father written around 1216. This would seem to indicate that Sava’s Life, dated around 1208, was written before Ne­ manja’s (Simeon’s) canonization, and would fix the date of his canonization sometime between 1208—1216. And this would also seem perfectly reasonable, since it would set his canoniza­ tion between the time that his relics were translated to Stu­ denica in 1207/08 —where, according to tradition, they soon began to work miracles (a prelude to sainthood)—and Stephen’s coronation in 1217, by which time Simeon, again according to

19

tradition, was regarded a national saint. However, according to early sources, the works of the monks Domentian and Theodo­ sius, Simeon’s canonization took place on the 13th of February 1201, one year to the day after his death. And to make matters even more complicated, more recent studies have set the date of his canonization in 1219.18 Therefore, the precise date of Simeon’s canonization in the Serbian Orthodox church is still a matter of speculation. Sava’s Life o f Saint Simeon, as this work came to be known, was not per se a separate work; rather it made up the first three chapters of the Studenica Typicon. The manuscript I utilized for my translation was published in Prague in 1870 by Pavel Safarik and entitled Zivot Sv. Symeona od Sv. Savy. It is a copy of a seventeenth-century manuscript that appeared in a collec­ tion of South Slavic literary monuments under the title Pamdtky Drevniho PisemnictviJihoslovanuv, and was published by Safarik in Prague in 1873. The seventeenth-century copy of the Life by St. Sava is now the only extant one. The Lives of Stephen Nemanja by his sons, Sava and Stephen, display an interesting contrast in that the latter’s Life, in keeping with the develop­ ment of Serbian letters toward a more secular orientation, is much more political than the former’s. In translating the preceding works, I have tried to maintain certain standards. In the first place, I was concerned with accur­ acy and have striven to translate as precisely as possible every­ thing that was written in the texts regardless of how obscure and/or elliptic the passage(s) might have been. When necessary I consulted other manuscripts, and have discussed difficulties with colleagues. A second goal was to capture the essence of the originals—without sounding too archaic—by suggesting its tone and mood insofar as modem English prose and syntax will allow. Hopefully I have not taken too many liberties with any of the manuscripts and/or committed an inordinate number of lapses. The solutions I offer on the following pages are my own and I accept full responsibility for them. For the translation of biblical allusions, paraphrases, and quotations I have utilized the King James Version of the Bible. It was chosen in order to render, particularly for the English reader, the flavor of medieval texts which abound in biblical allusions, paraphrases, and quotations. To have rendered such passages in a more modem English version of the Bible would have, to be sure, avoided certain archaisms but at the expense of the texts’ medieval essence. In so doing, however, I realize that such a distinction in style cannot be discerned in the ori­ ginal manuscripts. Since the vernacular was never admitted into

the literary language, and the literary language (OCS) of the first millennium was yet to develop a stylistically archaic— as opposed to “ modern”—level of language, the sacred and the profane, that is, biblical quotations and literary narrative, had to receive uniform treatment. As a result, the translation does indeed create an artificial distinction in style. This course was pursued in order to avoid the two extremes—a translation into a language and style that is completely archaic or completely modern. It should be further noted that all verbatim or near-verbatim biblical quotations are indicated in the right-hand margins, where chapter and verse are cited. References to allusions and paraphrases are confined to the Notes. Also, the translit­ eration of Slavic letters is handled according to the norms of the international scholarly system. Finally, I should like to thank my colleagues, Professors Carol Avins and Henry R. Cooper Jr., for reading and comment­ ing on my manuscript, and the Office of Research and Sponsored Programs of Northwestern University for providing funds for typing the manuscript and purchasing the facsimilies used in this work. Also, I wish to extend an especial word of thanks to my good friend, Dr. Paul F. Bakalar, for the role he played in the preparation of my work.

Notes to the Introduction 1 Norman W. Ingham, “ The Limits of Secular Biography in Medieval Slavic Literature, Particularly Old Russian,” American Contributions to the Sixth International Congress o f Slavists, Vol. II (The Hague: Mouton, 1968), p. 182. 2 Paul J. Alexander, “ Secular Biography at Byzantium,” Speculum, XV (1940), pp. 204-205. 3 Harold Nicolson, The Development o f English Biography (London, 1927), p. 135. 4 Ingham, p. 189. 5 See notes 33 and 34 to The Life o f Constantine. 6 The Vita o f Constantine and The Vita o f Methodius, trans. and com­ mentaries by Marvin Kantor and Richard S. White, Intro, by Antonin Dostal, Michigan Slavic Materials no. 13 (Ann Arbor: Dept, of Slavic Languages and Literatures, 1976), pp. x-xi. 7 Roman Jakobson, “ The Kernal of Comparative Slavic Literature,” Harvard Slavic Studies, I (1953), p. 52. 8 It should be noted that no doctrinal works reached Russia since none

21

22

9

10

11 12 13

14

15 16

17 18

were apparently sought. The Latin Fathers were virtually unknown in Kiev. However, such Latin works in Slavic form as the Life o f St. Benedict o f Nursia, the Life o f St. Conrad, the Life o f St. Julian o f Le Mans, the Life o f Pope Stephen, and the Martyrdom o f St. Appolin­ arius were transmitted. For a discussion of this see Norman W. Ingham, “ Czech Hagiography in Kiev: The Prisoner Miracles of Boris and Gleb,” Die Welt der Slaven, 10, no. 2 (July, 1965), pp. 166-82. See also D. Cyzevskyj, “ Anklange an die Gumpoldslegende des hi. Vaclav in der altrussischen Legende des hi. Feodosij und das Problem der Originalitat der slavischen mittelalterlichen Werke,” WsU, I (1950), pp. 71-86. Constantine-Cyril himself was never party to any such miracle. However, we do find in his Life what can be viewed as a variation on this theme. On several occasions in lieu of accepting rewards for his services, he asks that prisoners be freed. He asks this of the Khazar Kagan (Chap. 11), and of Prince Rostislav and Kocel (Chap. 15). Though not connected, it is interesting to note that the oldest Life of St. Ludmila was reworked from OCS in Latin. Stanislaus Hafner , Serbisches Mittelalter (Graz, 1962), I, p. 340. Henrik Birnbaum, “ Byzantine Tradition Transformed: The Old Serb­ ian Vita,” On Medieval and Renaissance Slavic Writing (The Hague: Mouton, 1974), p. 340. The traditional epithet for these Lives, “ Pannonian,” came about because of a mistaken nineteenth-century theory that OCS was a Pannonian dialect. Ihor Sevcenko, “ Three Paradoxes of the Cyrillo-Methodian Mission,” Slavic Review, XXIII, no. 2 (June, 1964), p. 231. See Roman Jakobson, “ Some Russian Echoes of the Czech Hagio­ graphy,” Annuaire d l’I nstitut de Philologie et d ’Histoire Orientate et Slaves, VII (New York, 1944), pp. 155-68. See Milos Weingart, “Prvni cesko-cirkveneslovanska legenda o svatem Vaclavu,” Svatovaclavsky Sbornik, I (Prague, 1934), pp. 863-1088. See Svetosavskizbornik, I (Belgrad, 1936), pp. 131-209.

TH E L I F E OF C O N S T A N T I N E

mm

THE VITA AND LIFE OF OUR BLESSED TEACHER Constantine the Philosopher, the First Preceptor of the Slavic People Bless us, Father Merciful and compassionate is God, who awaits the repentance of Man and will have all to be saved, and to come I Tim. unto the knowledge of the truth, for He wishes the sinner not 2:4 death but repentance and life even if he be given to malice.1 Neither does He allow mankind to fall away through weakness or be led into temptation by the Adversary and perish. Rather, in each age and epoch He has not ceased to grant us His abundant grace, even now just as it was in the beginning: at first through the Patriarchs and Fathers, and after them through the Prophets, then through the Apostles and Martyrs, and righteous men and teachers whom He chooses from amidst the tumult of this life. St. Cyril (XI-century fresco)

25

27 For the Lord knows His own, who are His, as He has said: “ My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and I call them by name, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life.” He did so John 10:27-28 also in our generation, having raised up for us this teacher who enlightened our nation, which did not wish to walk in the light of God’s commandments,2 and whose understanding was obscured by weakness and even more by the Devil’s wiles. Stated briefly, his Vita reveals what sort of man he was, so that hearing it, he who wishes —taking courage and rejecting idle­ ness - can follow him . For as the Apostle has said: “Be y e followers of I Cor. 11:1 me, even as I also am of Christ.”

There was a certain noble and rich man named Leo in the city of Thessalonica who held the rank of drungarios under the strategos. 3 He was, as Job once was, a pious man, and kept faith­ fully all God’s commandments. He begot seven children of which the youngest, the seventh, was Constantine the Philosopher, our preceptor and teacher. And when his mother bore him, he was given over to a wet-nurse for nursing. However, until the child was weaned he would not take any other breast but his mother’s. This was by God’s design so that there be a good offshoot from a good root. And after this the good parents agreed not to lie with each other. They never once transgressed their vow, but lived that way in the Lord for 14 years, parting in death. And when that devout man was wanted on Judgment Day, the mother of this child cried, saying: “ I am worried about nought save this one child and how he will be nurtured.” Then he said: “ Believe me, wife, I place my hope in God. He will give him for a father and steward one such as guides all Christians.” And so it came to pass. When he was seven the boy had a dream which he recounted to his father and mother, saying: “After the strategos had assem­ bled all the girls of our city, he said to me: ‘Choose her whom you wish as your wife and helpmate from among them.’ Gazing upon them and taking note of each one, I discerned the most beautiful of all, with a radiant face, richly adorned in gold necklaces and pearls, and all manner of finery. Her name was Sophia, that is, Wisdom. I chose her.” When his parents heard these words, they said to him: “Son, keep thy father’s commandment, and forsake not the law of thy mother. For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light. Say unto Wisdom, Thou art my sister; and call Understanding thy kinswoman. For Wisdom shines even more than the sun.4 And if you then take her to yourself as your wife, you will be delivered from much evil through her.” When they sent him for instruction, he

Proverbs 6:20,23 Proverbs 7:4 Wis. of Solomon 7:29

surpassed all his fellow students in learning, as his memory was very keen. He was then a marvel. As it was customary among the sons of the wealthy to take sport in the hunt, he one day took his falcon and went out to the fields with his companions. And when he released it, the wind rose by God’s design, caught the falcon and carried it off. The boy became very despondent and dejected by this, and would not eat for two days. But in His love for Man, merciful God did not wish the youth to become accustomed to things of this world and He lured him easily: Just as He lured Placidas 5 with a deer during a hunt long ago, so now He did Constantine with a falcon. Constantine thought to himself of the vanity of this life and repented, saying: “Is this life such that sorrow takes the place of joy? From this day forth I shall take a different path, a better one than this. But I shall not waste my days in the tumult of this life.” Taking up his studies, he remained at home and committed to memory the writings of St. Gregory the Theologian6. And making the sign of the cross upon the wall, he wrote the following eulogy to St. Gregory: “O Gregory, thou art a man in body but an angel in spirit. Thou, a man in body, appeared as an angel. For thy lips praise God like one of the Seraphim, and enlighten the universe with the teaching of the true faith. Therefore, accept me who comes to thee with love and faith and be my teacher and en­ lightener.” To such things did he pledge himself. He immersed himself in numerous discourses and in lofty thought but was unable to comprehend their profundity and fell prey to a great sadness. There lived a certain foreigner who knew grammar. Going to him and falling at his feet in humility, Constantine begged him to teach him thoroughly the art of grammar. But burying his talent, the man said to him: “ Young man, do not trouble yourself. I have renounced teaching this to anyone for the rest of my life.” Again the youth begged him, saying in tears: “ Take all the share due me from my father’s house, but teach me.” Since the man did not wish to listen further to him, Constantine returned home and prayed that he would gain his heartfelt desire. God soon fulfills the desire of them that fear Him. Upon hearing of the keeness, wisdom, and zeal for learning with which he was im­ bued, the Emperor’s administrator, called the Logothete, 7 sent for Constantine to study together with the Emperor. Learning of this, the boy joyfully set out. And on the way he knelt in prayer to the Lord, saying: “ O God of our fathers, and Lord of mercy, who hast made all things with Thy Word, and ordained man through Thy Wisdom, that he should have dominion over the creatures which Thou hast made, give me Wisdom, that sitteth by

29

Psalm 145:19

Wis. of Solomon 9:1-2 Wis. of Solomon 9:4

Thy throne, so that I might understand what is Thy will and be saved. For I am Thy servant, and the son of Thine handmaid.” 8 And in addition he recited the remainder of Solomon’s prayer and, rising, said: “ Amen.” When he arrived in the Imperial City9 he was entrusted to teachers to be taught. In three months he mastered grammar and began other studies. He studied Homer and geometry with Leo, and dialectics10 and all philosophical studies with Photius;11 and in addition to that, rhetoric and arithmetic, astronomy and music, and all the other Hellenic arts. He mastered them all just as though he were mastering only one of them. For keenness joined with zeal, the one vying with the other, by which ability studies are perfected. But more than studiousness, a newly serene countenance became him. He conferred 12 with those who were more bene­ ficial and turned from those who turned to malice, for he thought and acted only to acquire heavenly things in place of earthly ones and to quit his body and live with God. When the Logothete saw that he was so disposed, he gave him control over his entire house and free entry to the royal palace. Sometime after this, he once questioned him, saying: “ Philosopher, I wish to learn what philosophy is.” With his quick mind, he replied immediately: “ The knowl­ edge of matters divine and human, to what extent man can ap­ proach God and how, through virtue, man is taught to be in the image and likeness of the One who created him.” And the Logothete grew to love him even more, as he, this great and venerable man, questioned him about these things. Constantine made known to him the study of philosophy and in a few words showed great keenness of mind. Living in chastity and pleasing God greatly, Constantine became ever more loved by all. And many desired and wished to be joined with him through love and, in accordance with their strength, to imitate as fully as possible his virtuous and godly way of life. For all simply loved his keenness of mind greatly. And the Logothete rendered him the highest honors and offered him much gold but he did not accept. Once, some time after this, he said to him: “More than anything else your keenness of mind and wisdom compel me to love you. I have a goddaughter whom I took out of the font.13 She is beautiful, wealthy and from a good and noble family. If you wish, I shall give her to you as your wife. And from the Emperor accept eminence, and a governorship. And expect even more, for soon you will be a strategos.” Then the philosopher answered him, saying: “This is indeed a great gift for those who have need of it. But for me nothing is

31 Wis. of Solomon 9:5 Psalm 116:16

greater than learning. Having acquired knowledge, through it I wish to seek the honor and wealth of my ancestors.14 Upon hearing his reply, the Logothete went to the Emperor15 and said: “This young Philosopher does not love this life. Let us not exclude him from the community but tonsure him and give him over to the priesthood and service. Let him be librarian to the patriarch in St. Sophia. At least in this way shall we keep him.” And that was what they did with him. After staying with them as such for a short time, Constan­ tine left for the Narrow Sea and hid himself there in a monastery.16 They sought him for six months before they were able to find him. Unable to prevail upon him to accept that position, they convinced him to accept an academic chair and teach philosophy to his countrymen and foreigners with full assistance and aid. And he accepted this. At that time John, who was Patriarch of Constantinople, started the iconoclastic heresy in the Imperial C ity17, saying that one should not honor the holy icons. Having convened a council, they charged him with speaking falsely and expelled him from office. He said: “ They have expelled me by force but they have not convinced me, for no one can dispute my words.” And when the Emperor together with the patricians had prepared the Philos­ opher, he sent him against John to whom he said: “If you can prevail over this youth, you will again receive your office.” Per­ ceiving that the Philosopher was young in body like those who were sent with him, he said to them: “None of you are worthy of being my footstool so why should I wish to dispute with you?” The Philosopher said to him: “Keep not the ways of Man but heed God’s commandments. For just as you are created by God from earth and spirit, so are we all. Therefore, O man, when gazing upon the earth, be not arrogant.” And John answered again: “ It is not fitting to seek flowers in the fall nor to drive an old man to war, as Nestor the youth.” 18 The Philosopher answered him: “You are directing accusa­ tions at yourself. Tell me, at which age is the spirit stronger than the body?” He said: “In old age.” The Philosopher then said: “And to which combat are we driving you, answer me, bodily or spiritual?” He said: “Spiritual.” The Philosopher answered: “Now you wish to be stronger. Thus do not tell us such parables, for we are not seeking flowers out of season, nor do we drive you to war.” The old man was so shamed that he turned the conversation

to another matter and said: “ Tell me, young man, why do we not worship a broken cross nor kiss it, while you are not ashamed to render honor to an icon though it be depicted only in bust-form?” The Philosopher answered: “ Because the cross has four parts, but if one of its parts is missing it no longer has its image. However, an icon of the face alone is an image and likeness of the one depicted. For whoever sees it, perceives neither a lion’s face nor a lynx’s but an image of the original.” Then the old man said: “ Why do we worship a cross with­ out an inscription when there are also other crosses? However, if an icon is not inscribed with the name of its image, why do you not render honor to it? ” The Philosopher answered: “ Because each cross has the same image as the cross of Christ, but not all icons have one and the same image.” The old man said: “ When God spoke to Moses He said: ‘Thou shalt not make any likeness.’ 19 Why then do you make them and worship them?” And to this the Philosopher replied: “ Had He said: ‘Thou shalt not make any kind of likeness,’ you would be correct. But He said: ‘Not any,’ that is, any unworthy.” Unable to contradict this, the old man fell silent, ashamed. Afterward the Hagarites, who were called Saracens, blas­ phemed the single Deity of the Holy Trinity, saying: “ How is it, O Christians, that you, while holding that God is one, further divide Him into three, saying He is Father, Son, and Spirit? If you can explain clearly, send us men who can speak of this and con­ vince us.” 20 At that time the Philosopher was 24 years of age. Having convened a council, the Emperor summoned Constantine and said to him: “ Do you hear, Philosopher, what the nasty Hagarites are saying against our faith? Since you are a servant and disciple of the Holy Trinity, go and oppose them. And may God, the Accomplisher of all, Who is glorified in the Trinity, the Father and Son and Holy Spirit, grant you grace and strength in words. And may He reveal you a second David against Goliath whom he defeated with three stones,21 and return you to us made worthy of the heavenly kingdom.” Upon hearing this, Constantine answered: “ I shall gladly go for the Christian faith. For what in this world could be sweeter for me than to live and die for the Holy Trinity!” And they assigned the court secretary, George, to him and sent them.22 When they came there they saw strange and vile things

35

Exodus, 20:4

37 which the God-fighting Hagarites did to deride and mock Chris­ tians. In these places all those living in piety in Christ were caused much grief. Thus on the outside doors of all Christians they painted images of demons playing games and grimacing. And they asked the Philosopher, saying: “Philosopher, can you understand what this sign means?” Then he said: “I see demonic images and assume that Chris­ tians dwell within. However, the demons are unable to live with them and flee from them. But wherever this sign is not present on the outside, the demons dwell with those inside.” At dinner the Hagarites, a wise people, well versed in schol­ arship, geometry, astronomy and other sciences, tested Constan­ tine and questioned him, saying: “Philosopher, perceive you the wondrous miracle, how the Prophet Mohammed brought us joyful tidings from God and converted many people; and how we all keep his law without transgressing in any way? But in keeping Christ’s law, you act and do whatever pleases each of you, one this, another that.” To this the Philosopher answered: “Our God is like the breadth of the sea. Thus did the Prophet speak of Him: ‘And who Isaiah shall declare His generation? for He was cut off out of the land of 53:8 the living.’ For the sake of this search many set out on this sea: And with His help the strong in mind sail across and return, re­ ceiving a wealth of understanding. But the weak in mind, some sink like those attempting to cross in rotten ships, while others flounder in impotent idleness, barely breathing from exhaustion. However, your sea is deceptive and self-serving, so that anyone, great and small can leap across. For it is not beyond the wonts of man but something one can easily do. Now Mohammed for­ bade you nothing else. Since he did not restrain your anger and lust but allowed them, do you know into which abyss he will cast you? Let the sensible understand: Christ is not that way. Rather, He raises up what is difficult from beneath through faith and divine action. As the Creator of everything, He created man between the angels and beasts. For man is distinguished from beasts by his speech and intelligence, and from angels by his anger and lust. And he shall participate either in higher or lower realms in accor­ dance with the realm he approaches.” And again they questioned him: “Since God is one, why do you glorify Him as three? If you know, explain this! For you call Him Father, Son, and Spirit. If this be so, give Him a wife as well, so that many gods might be sired by Him.” To this the Philosopher answered: “ Do not speak such des­ picable blasphemies. For well have we learned from the prophets and fathers and teachers to glorify the Trinity, the Father, the Word johni:i4

and the Spirit, three hypostases in one being. And the Word be­ came flesh in the Virgin and was bom for the sake of our salva­ tion, as your prophet Mohammed bore witness when he wrote the following: ‘We sent our spirit to the Virgin, having consented that She gave birth.’ From this I apprise you of the Trinity.” Defeated by these words, they turned to another matter, saying: “As you say, O friend. But if Christ is your God, why do you not do as He commands? For in the Gospels it is written: ‘Pray for your enemies, do good to them that hate you and perse­ cute you, and unto them that smite you turn your cheek!’23You are not like that but, on the contrary, you sharpen weapons against those who treat you in such a manner.” In answer to this the Philosopher said: “ If the law contains two precepts, who appears to fulfill the law? He who keeps one precept, or both? They answered: “Obviously he who keeps both.” The Philosopher then said: “God said: ‘Pray for them which despitefully use you.’ And He also said: ‘Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.’ We do this for the sake of friends, lest their souls be captured together with their bodies.” And again they questioned him, saying: “Christ paid tribute for Himself and others. Why do you not do as He did? And if you keep yourself from it, why do you not at least pay tribute for your brethren and friends to the great and powerful race of Ishmael? We ask little, only one piece of gold. And for as long as the entire earth endures, we shall keep peace among ourselves as no one else.” The Philosopher answered: “When Christ paid tribute which Empire existed, the Ishmaelite or the Roman?” They answered: “Obviously the Roman.” Constantine said: “Therefore you ought not scorn us for we all pay tribute to the Romans.” After this they asked him many other questions, testing him in all the arts that they themselves knew. He explained everything to them. And when he had convinced them, they again said to him: “How do you know all this?” The Philosopher said: “A certain man drew water from the sea and, carrying it in a bag, boasted to strangers, saying: ‘See this water? No one has any except me!’ To him came a man who lived by the sea and said: ‘Are you not ashamed of what you are saying, boasting merely about this stinking bag? We have a sea of it!’ You are acting the same way. All the arts have come from us.” 24 And afterwards, playing games, they showed him a culti­ vated garden in which some of the things appeared to have at once

39

Koran Sura 19:17

Matthew 5:44 Luke 6:29 Matthew 5:39

Luke 6:28 John 15:13

sprung from the earth. And when he explained to them how this came about, they further showed him all manner of wealth, and houses adorned with gold and silver and precious stones and pearls, saying: “Philosopher, behold the wondrous miracle! Mighty is the power and great the wealth of Amerumnin,25 lord of the Saracens.” Then he said to them: “ This is not wondrous. Glory and praise be to God who has created all these things and given them to man for his consolation. For these things are His and no other’s.” And when they heard this from him, they became angry and resorted to their usual evil ways. Intending to poison him, they mixed a deadly potion and gave him to drink of it. But merciful God, who said to all who truly believe in Him, “ and if you drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt you,” 26 preserved Constan­ tine from harm from that fatal drink and returned him again to his native land in good health. A short time after this Constantine renounced this life en­ tirely, settled in a place away from the tumult and heeded himself alone. He kept nothing for the next day even for bodily nourish­ ment but, upon receiving something, distributed it all to the poor, and placed his hope in God who cares for everyone every day.27 Once, when his servant was downcast on a holy day and said, “we have nothing for this holy day,” Constantine said to him: “He who once nourished the Israelites in the wilderness shall also give us food here.28 Therefore, go and summon at least five poor men who are awaiting God’s help.” And when the dinner hour came, immediately a certain man brought a great quantity of food and ten pieces of gold. And Constantine rendered praise unto God for all this. He then went to his brother Methodius at 01ympus29and re­ mained there, praying incessantly to God and conversing only with the Scriptures. For he and his brother always, day and night, de­ voted themselves to this. And thus, exalting in his heart, he con­ ducted his life honorably, adding labor upon labor and excelling greatly in godly virtues. But enough of this for now. And then to the Greek Emperor came emissaries from the Khazars,30 saying: “From the beginning we have known one God who is above all, and worshipped Him facing east. However, we keep other shameful customs. The Jews exhort us to accept their faith and ways, while on the other hand the Saracens, offering us peace and many gifts, press us, saying: ‘Our faith is better than that of all other peoples.’ Maintaining our former love and friend­ ship, we therefore have come to you. For you are a great people

41

Mark 16:18

and your empire is from God. And in requesting your counsel, we ask of you a learned man. Should he prevail over the Jews and Saracens, we shall accept your faith.” Then the Emperor sought the Philosopher and, after finding him, told him of the Khazars’ words, saying: “ Philosopher, go to these people, preach and answer for the Holy Trinity with Its help. For no one else is capable of doing this properly.” He said: “If you command, lord, on such a mission I shall gladly go on foot and unshod, lacking all the Lord forbade His disciples to bring.” 31 The Emperor answered, saying: “Well spoken; were you to do this! But bear in mind the imperial power and honor, and go honorably and with imperial help.” He immediately set out on his way. After coming to Kher­ son, he learned the Hebrew language and scriptures and translated eight parts of the grammar,32 from which he acquired understand­ ing. A certain Samaritan living there would come to Constantine and debate with him. And he brought Samaritan scriptures and showed them to him. The Philosopher asked him for them, locked himself in his room and gave himself up to prayer. And having ob­ tained understanding from God, he began to read the scriptures without error. When the Samaritan saw this, he cried out in a loud voice and said: “ Verily, those who believe in Christ quickly re­ ceive Grace and the Holy Spirit.” His son was baptized immedi­ ately and he himself was baptized after him. And Constantine found there the Gospels and the Psalter written in Russian Jetters.33 And he also found a man who spoke that language. And having conversed with him and acquiring the power of his speech by comparing it to his own language, he dis­ tinguished letters, vowels and consonants, and offering a prayer to God, he soon began to read and speak. And they were amazed at him and praised God. And when he heard that St. Clement was still lying in the sea,34 he prayed and said: “ I believe in God and place my hope in St. Clement, that I shall find him and take him from the sea.” After persuading the Archbishop, they boarded a ship with all the clergy and pious men and set out for that spot.35 A great calm came over the sea and they arrived and began to dig, chanting. And immediately a strong fragrance arose as if there were many censers, and then the holy relics appeared. To the glory of all the townsmen, they raised them with great reverence and carried them into the city, as Constantine writes in his Discovery. 36 A Khazar commander came with his troops, surrounded a certain Christian city, and laid siege to it. Upon learning of this, the Philosopher went to him without hesitation. Conversing with

43

him, he imparted his edifying words and calmed him. He promised Constantine to be baptized. The Philosopher continued on his way. And while he was reciting the prayer of the first hour, Hungarians37 fell upon him howling like wolves and wishing to kill him. But he was not fright­ ened and did not forsake his prayers, crying out only, “ Lord, have mercy!” for he had already completed the office. Seeing him, they were calmed by God’s design and began to bow to him. And upon hearing edifying words from his lips, they released him and his entire retinue in peace. Having boarded a ship, Constantine set out for the land of the Khazars by way of the Meotis Sea and Caspian Gates of the Caucasus Mountains.38 The Khazars sent a cunning and resourceful man to meet him, who entered into conversation with him and said to him : “Why do you follow the evil custom of replacing one em­ peror with another of a different lineage?39We do this only accord­ ing to lineage.” The Philosopher said to him : “ Yet in place of Saul, who did nothing to please Him, God chose David, who was pleasing to Him, and David’s lineage.” And furthermore the Khazar40 said: “Why is it you hold the Scriptures in hand, and recite all parables from it? However, we do not do so, but take all wisdom from the heart as though it were absorbed.41 We do not pride ourselves in writing as you do.” And the Philosopher said to him: “I shall answer you in regard to this. If you meet a naked man and he says: ‘I have many garments and gold,’ would you believe him, seeing him naked?” He said: “No.” Then Constantine said to him: “So I say unto you. If you have absorbed all wisdom as you boast, tell me how many generations are there from Adam to Moses, and how many years did each generation endure?” Unable to answer this, the Khazar fell silent. When Constantine came for the feast at the Kagan’s42 and they wished to seat him, they questioned him, saying: “What is your station so that we may seat you according to your rank?” And he said: “ I had a great and very renowned forefather who stood close to the Emperor. But he voluntarily rejected the great honor granted him and was banished. He became impover­ ished after going to a foreign land, and there he begot me. Though I have sought my forefather’s former station, I have not succeeded in obtaining it, for I am Adam’s scion.” They then said: “ O guest, you speak worthily and rightly.” And from that moment they began to confer honor upon him.

45

Taking up his cup, the Kagan said: “ Let us drink in the name of the One God who made all creation.” Taking up his cup, the Philosopher said: “I drink in the name of the One God and His Word, who by His Word made all creation and through Whom the heavens were established; and in the name of the life-giving Spirit through Whom all their power exists.” 43 The Kagan answered him: “We say the same but maintain the following difference: you glorify the Trinity, while we, having obtained Scriptures, the One God.” Then the Philosopher said: “The Scriptures proclaim the Word and the Spirit. If somone renders honor unto you but will not honor your word and spirit, whereas yet another will honor all three, which of the two renders greater honor?” He said: “The one who honors all three.” And the Philosopher answered: “ Thus,wedomore by reveal­ ing it in deeds and obeying the prophets. For Isaiah said: ‘Hearken unto me, O Jacob and Israel, my called; I am the first, I am for ever. And now the Lord, and His Spirit, hath sent me.’ ” 44 Then the Jews standing around Constantine said to him: “ Tell us now, how is it possible for a woman to bear God in her womb upon whom she may not even look, let alone45 give birth to.” And pointing his finger at the Kagan and his first counsellor, the Philosopher said: “ If someone says: ‘The first counsellor can­ not entertain the Kagan’;but furthermore says: ‘The latter’s lowest slave can entertain the Kagan and render honor unto him,’ what are we to call him, tell me, insane or sensible?” And they said: “Very much insane.” Then the Philosopher said to them: “Which of the visible creatures is the most honored of all?” They answered him: “Man, for he was created in the image of God.” 46 And again the Philosopher said to them: “ Indeed, are they not raving who say it is not possible for God to be contained in man, since He was contained in the bush and in the cloud, in the whirlwind and smoke, having appeared so to Moses and Job.47 Otherwise how can the sick be healed? For when mankind comes to perdition, from whom can it further await renewal if not from the very Creator Himself? Answer me! If a doctor wishes to apply a plaster to the sick, would he or would he not apply it to a tree or to a stone? And will he be able to heal a man by this?” “ And how could Moses in his prayer through the Holy Spirit say with outstretched arms, ‘In the thunder of stones and in the voice of trumpets reveal yourself unto us no more, merciful Lord, but having removed our sins, abide inside us.’ ” For thus

47

Isaiah 48:12 Isaiah 48:16

speaks Aquila.48 And thus they departed from the feast after set­ ting a day when they would speak about all this. When he sat down again with the Kagan, the Philosopher said: “I am the only man among you without kin or friends. We are debating about God in whose hands all things are, even our hearts. While we are speaking, let those of you who are strong in words say, of what they comprehend, it is so, but of what they fail to comprehend, let them ask and we shall explain.” The Jews then answered and said: “We observe both the Word and Spirit in the Scriptures. Tell us, which law did God first give to man, the law of Moses or the one you observe?” The Philosopher said: “ Do you ask this because you observe the first law?” And they answered: “Yes, for one should observe the first.” Then the Philosopher said: “If you wish to observe the first law, then totally reject circumcision.” Then they said: “Why say you so?” And the Philosopher said: “Tell me truthfully, was the first law given with circumcision or without circumcision?” They answered; “We think with circumcision.” Then he said to them: “ After the commandment to Adam and his apostasy, gave not God first the law to Noah, calling the law covenant? For He said unto him: ‘Behold, I establish my cov­ enant with you and with your seed, and the entire earth,’ which is contained in three commandments: ‘Eat everything as the green herb, as much as there is in the heavens, upon the earth and in the waters. Only ye shall not eat flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof.’ And, ‘whoso sheddeth man’s blood, let his own be shed in his stead.’49 What say you? Do you observe the first law?” The Jews answered him: “We observe the first law of Moses which God did not call law but covenant, just as at first to man in Paradise He called one thing a commandment, and another thing something else to Abraham, that is, circumcision and not law.50 For one is law while the other is covenant, and the Creator called the two by different names.” Then the Philosopher answered them: “ But I would give the following explanation concerning this. The law is called covenant, for God said unto Abraham: ‘I give my law in your flesh,’ and He called it a token, ‘and it shall be betwixt me and you.’ And He also cried out unto Jeremiah: ‘Hear this covenant and speak,’ He said, ‘unto the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and say unto them: Thus saith the Lord God of Israel; Cursed be the man that obeyeth not the words of this cov­ enant which I commanded your fathers in the day I brought them

49

Genesis 9:9 Genesis 9:3-4,6

Genesis 17:11 leremiah 11:2-4

forth out of the land of Egypt.’ ” And the Jews answered him: “We too maintain that the law is also called covenant. And of the many that have observed the law of Moses, all have pleased God. We who also keep the law think the same applies to us. But you are trampling God’s law, having established another Law.” The Philosopher said to them: “We do rightly. For had Abraham not accepted circumcision but observed Noah’s covenant, he would not have been called the Friend of God,51 nor would have Moses, rewriting the law afterward, had he not observed the first law. Thus, we too follow their example. And having received the law from God, we observe it so that God’s commandment remains firm. For when the law was given to Noah, He did not say unto him, ‘I will give another law,’ but said that it shall remain forever in the living soul. Likewise, having given Abraham the promise He did not proclaim unto him, ‘I shall give Moses another law.’ Do you then observe the law? And God cried out through Ezekiel: ‘I will change it and give you another.’52 For Jeremiah clearly said: ‘Be­ hold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new cove­ nant with the house of Judah and the house of Israel: Not accord­ ing to the covenant that I made with your fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; because they abide not by my covenant and I began to hate them. But this shall be my covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws within their minds and write it upon their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.’52 And again the same Jeremiah said: ‘Thus saith the Lord: Stand ye in the ways, and see the true path and walk therein, and ye shall find purification for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein. I set watchmen over you say­ ing, Hearken to the sound of the trumpet. But they said, We will not hearken. Therefore hear ye nations and pastors of the flock among them.’ And then, ‘Hear, O earth: behold I will bring evil upon this people, the fruit of their apostasy, because they have not hearkened unto my words; and my law, that the prophets pro­ claimed, they have rejected.’54Indeed, not only by this alone shall I show that the law has ceased, but clearly by other proofs as well.” The Jews answered him: “Verily every Jew knows that it shall be so, but the time for the Anointed One has not yet come.” And the Philosopher said to them: “ How can you declare this, seeing that Jerusalem was destroyed and that sacrifices have ceased, and everything the prophets prophesied about you has come to pass? For Malachi cried out clearly: ‘I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of Hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand. For from the rising of the sun even unto the going

51

Jeremiah 31:31-33

Jeremiah 6:16-19

Malachi

1 : 10-11

down, my name shall be glorified among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of Hosts.’ ” Then they said: “ You are saying: All Gentiles wish to be blessed and circumcised in the city of Jerusalem.” The Philosopher said: “ Then why does Moses say: ‘If ye shall obediently obey and in every way keep the law, your borders shall be from the Red Sea to the Philistine Sea, 55 and from the wil­ derness to the River Euphrates.’56 But we Gentiles are blessed in the seed of Abraham, having come forth from a shoot of Jesse,57 and in the one called the hope of the Gentiles and light of all lands and islands. Illuminated by the glory of God, the prophets cry out loudly but not according to the same law nor place. For Zechariah said: ‘Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion: behold thy king cometh unto thee, lowly, and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt the foal of an ass.’ And furthermore: ‘He shall destroy the arms from Ephraim and the warhorse from Jerusalem, and he shall speak peace unto the heathen: and his dominion shall be from the ends of the earth to the ends of the universe.’58 And Jacob said: ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor the lawgiver from between his feet, until he comes who is predestined, and he shall be the hope of the people.’59 Since you have seen all this accom­ plished and fulfilled, whom else do you await? For Daniel, who was instructed by an angel, said: ‘There shall be seventy weeks until Christ the Vicar, that is, four hundred and ninety years to seal up vision and prophecy.’60 Of whose iron kingdom,61 in your opinion, did Daniel think in the vision?” They answered: “ The Roman.” Then the Philosopher asked them: “ Who is the stone that was cut out from the mountain by no human hand?” 62 They answered: “ The Anointed One.” And they said fur­ ther: “ If it be interpreted according to the prophets and other things that He has come already, as you say, why does the Roman Empire still retain its dominion?” The Philosopher answered: “ It does not retain it, for it is gone just as the others according to the image in the vision. Now our kingdom is not Roman but Christ’s, as the prophet said: ‘The God of Heaven shall set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and His kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.’ For is it not a Christian kingdom that is now called by Christ’s name? The Romans, however, revered idols. But they - now from one nation and tribe, now from another —rule in the name of Christ,63 as the prophet Isaiah reveals speaking to you:

53

Zechariah 9:9-10

Genesis 49:10

Daniel 2:44

‘Ye have left your name in plenitude unto my chosen: for the Lord shall slay ye, and call His servants by a new name, which will be blessed over the entire earth. For they shall bless the true God, and those who swear upon the earth, shall swear by God in heaven.’64 Have not the prophecies of all the prophets who have spoken plainly of Christ been fulfilled already? For Isaiah announces His birth from a virgin saying thus: ‘Behold a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel: which, being interpreted, is, God with us.’And Micah said: ‘And thou, Bethlehem, the land of Judah, art not the least among the rulers of Judah, yet out of thee shall come forth a ruler unto me that shall tend my people Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting. Therefore will he give them up until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth.’65 And Jeremiah said: ‘Ask ye now, and see whether a man doth travail with child? Alas! that day is great, so that none is like it: it is even the time of Jacob’s trouble, but he shall be saved out of it.’ And Isaiah said: ‘Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was de­ livered of a manchild.’ ” And again the Jews spoke: “We are of the blessed seed of Shem, blessed by our father Noah, but you are not.” Explaining this to them, Constantine said: “The blessing of your father is nothing more than praise to God, neither does it per­ tain to Shem. For it is thus: ‘Blessed be the Lord God of Shem.’ But to Japheth, from whom we descend, he said: ‘God shall enlarge Japheth and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem.” And explaining to them from the Prophets and other Scrip­ tures, Constantine did not leave them until they themselves said: “ It is just as you say.” And they spoke: “ Why, having hope in man, do you pretend to be blessed when the Scriptures curse the like of you?” The Philosopher answered: “ Is David cursed or blessed?” They said: “Most blessed.” And the Philosopher said: We also have hope in the One in whom he hoped. For it is said in the Psalms: ‘The man of my peace,66 in Him have I hope.” And that man is Christ, and God. But he who has hope in an ordinary man, we also consider him cursed.” . And again they put forth another example, saying: “How can you Christians reject circumcision when Christ did not reject it but performed it according to the law?” The Philosopher answered: “But He who once said to Abra­ ham: ‘Behold, this is a token betwixt me and you,67 having come, fulfilled it and maintained it from that time to this.68 However,

55 Isaiah 65:15-16

Isaiah 7:14 Matthew 1:23 Micah 5:2-3 Matthew 2:6

Jeremiah 30:6-7

Isaiah 66:7

Genesis 9:26-27

Psalm 41:9

Genesis 17:11

He did not allow it to continue henceforth, but gave us baptism.” And they said: “Then why were there once others who pleased God, and yet did not accept this token but Abraham’s?” The Philosopher answered: “ Because none of them, it appears, had two wives save Abraham. Therefore He circumcised the flesh of his foreskin, setting a boundary not to be transgressed further; however He set an example for others to follow in accord­ ance with the first period of Adam’s life. And He did the same unto Jacob, having shrunk the sinew of his thigh for taking four wives. He named Jacob Israel, that is, the mind that sees God, after he understood the reason for which this was done unto him. For, it appears, he was no longer to have relations with a woman. But Abraham did not understand this.” 69 And again the Jews questioned: “ How can you who worship idols pretend to please God?” The Philosopher answered: “ Learn first to distinguish the nouns, what an image is and what an idol, and considering this, do not assail Christians. For in your language there are ten nouns for this term. Therefore, I now ask you: Was the tabernacle which Moses carried down the mountain an image or an image of an image, a comparable image which he skillfully made with taches and skins and twined linens and extraordinary cherubim? 70 And since he made it in this way, do we say that you for this reason render homage and worship wood, skins and twined linens rather than God who at that time had given such an image? The same is true of Solomon’s temple, since it had figures of cherubim and angels and images of many other things.71 Thus, we Christians also make images of those who pleased God, distinguishing good from demo­ niac images, and thereby render like honor. For the Scriptures condemn those who sacrifice their sons and daughters to devils.”72 And the Jews said: “ How is it that by eating the meat of swine and hare you do not oppose God.” 73 He answered them: “Because the first covenant commands, ‘Eat all things even as the green herb.’ For unto the pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled, even their conscience is defiled. And God speaks in Genesis: ‘Behold, everything is very good.’74 But because of your greed, He withheld some things from you. ‘For Jacob ate,’ he said, ‘and was sated, and His beloved forsook Him.’75 And furthermore: ‘The people sat down to eat and to drink, and rose up to play.’ ” Thus, having condensed this from much, we set it down briefly for remembrance sake. And he who wishes to seek the ac­ tual discussions in their entirely can find them in Constantine’s writings, which our teacher, Archbishop Methodius, translated and divided into eight discourses.76 And there one shall see the power

57

Genesis 9:3 Titus 1:15 Genesis 1:31 Exodus 32:6

of words inspired by God’s grace, which like a flame burns oppo­ nents. Hearing his sweet and seemly words, the chieftains said to him : “You were sent here for our edification by God, and from Him learned all the Scriptures; you have spoken properly, delighting each of us in full with the mellifluous words from the Holy Scrip­ tures. But we are an illiterate poeple and believe you are from God. Moreover, if you wish to bring peace to our souls, explain every­ thing to us with parables in the order we ask them of you.” And thus they parted in order to rest. f

When they gathered on the following day they spoke to him, saying: “ O venerable man, demonstrate to us through parables and reason which faith is best of all.” The Philosopher answered them: “ Two newly-weds lived in high esteem with a certain king and were much loved. However, because they sinned, he banished them, and sent them away from the land. Living in exile for many years, they begot children in poverty. The children gathered together and took counsel con­ cerning the way in which they could regain their former station. One of them spoke this way, another that, and still another gave different counsel. Therefore, which counsel is worthy of support? Ought it not be the best?” And they said: “Why say you this? Surely each considers his own counsel best, the Saracens too, and others theirs.77 Tell us, which of these is the best opinion?” The Philosopher then said: “Fire tests gold and silver; but through reason man distinguishes a lie from the truth. Therefore tell me: What was the reason for the First Fall? Was it not for beholding the sweet fruit as well as craving divinity?” And they said: “That is so.” The Philosopher then said: “ And if harm befell someone who ate honey and drank cold water, and a doctor came and said to him: ‘Eat more honey and you will recover.’ And to the one who will have drunk the water he says: ‘Drink your fill of cold water and stand naked in the frost and you will recover.’ But another doctor speaks otherwise and prescribes the opposite treatment: ‘Instead of honey drink something bitter, and fast; and instead of cold, drink something tepid and warm yourself.’ Which then of these two treats more skillfully?” They all answered: “The one who prescribes the opposite treatment. For it is fitting to destroy lustful sweetness with the bitterness of life, and pride with humility, treating everything with its opposite. And we also say: ‘The tree which is first to put forth a thorn will be last to bear sweet fruit.’ ”

59

And again the Philosopher answered: “Well spoken.78 For Christ’s Law reveals the austerity of a godly life which afterwards, in the eternal dwellings, brings fruit one hundredfold.” Then one of them, who knew well the malice of the Sara­ cens, asked the Philosopher: “ Tell me, O guest, why do you not support Mohammed? For he praised Christ highly in his writings, saying: ‘He was born of a virgin, a sister of Moses, the great pro­ phet,’ and that, ‘He resurrected the dead and with great power healed all sickness.’ ” 79 And the Philosopher answered him: “ Let the Kagan judge between us. Tell me though, if Mohammed is a prophet, how can we have faith in Daniel? For Daniel said: ‘Unto Christ all vision and prophesy shall cease.’80 How can he who appeared after Christ be a prophet? For if we call him a prophet, we reject Daniel.” Then many of them spoke: “ What Daniel said was said through the spirit of God. As for Mohammed, who spewed forth his greatest deceptions from malice and dissoluteness, we all know him to be a liar and the bane of everyone’s salvation.” And the first counsellor among them said to the friends of the Saracens: “ With God’s help this guest has dashed all the pride of the Jews on the ground, but yours has he cast to the other side of the river like filth.” And now Constantine spoke to all the people: “Just as God gave the Christian Emperor power 81 over all nations and consum­ mate wisdom, so He entrusted also to them the faith without which none can live eternal life. Glory be to God forever!” And in tears the Philosopher said to all: “ Brethren and fathers, friends and children! Behold, God has given all understanding and an ap­ propriate answer. And if there is still someone who is opposed, let him come forth and be convincing, else he be convinced. And he who heeds this, may he be baptized in the name of the Holy Trin­ ity. He who does not desire this, from his sin am I removed; but he himself will see Judgment Day when the Ancient of Days shall sit in judgment of all nations as God.” 82 They answered: “We are not our own enemies; but gradu­ ally, he who can, for thus do we command, may he be baptized voluntarily, if he wishes even from this day. But those among us who bow to the west, or pray in the manner of Jews, or keep the Sara­ cen faith, shall soon be put to death by us.” And thus they parted joyfully. At that time about two hundred of these people were baptized, having cast off heathen abominations and lawless mar­ riages. And the Kagan wrote the following epistle to the Emperor: “ Lord, you have sent us a man who in word and deed has shown us that the Christian faith is holy. We are convinced it is the true

61

faith and, in the hope that we too shall attain it, we have com­ manded all to be baptized voluntarily. We all are friends of your Empire and are at your service wherever you require it.” Seeing the Philosopher off, the Kagan offered him many gifts, but he did not accept them, saying: “ Give me as many Greek cap­ tives as you have here. That means more to me than all your gifts.” Having gathered about two hundred captives, they gave them to him. And he went on his way, rejoicing. When they reached a waterless, barren region, they could not endure the thirst. Though they found water in a salt marsh, they could not drink of it for it was like gall. And when they all separated to search for water, Constantine said to Methodius, his brother: “I can endure the thirst no longer. Scoop up some of this water. For He who once turned bitter water into sweet for the Israelites shall also bring us comfort.” 83 Scooping it up, they found it sweet like honey, and cold. And they both drank, praising God for accomplishing this for His servants. While supping with the archbishop in Kherson, the Philos­ opher said to him: “ Pray forme, Father, as my own father would.” And when some of them asked him in private why he had done this, the Philosopher answered: “Verily, on the morrow he shall leave us and depart unto the Lord.” And so it was; these words came to pass. In the land of Phoullae stood a great oak which had grown together with a cherry tree, and under it sacrifices were offered.84 It was called Alexander, and women were not permitted to ap­ proach it or the sacrifices. When the Philosopher learned of this, he did not hesitate to betake himself to them. And standing among them, he said to them: “ The Hellenites inherited eternal torment for having worshiped as God the heavens and the earth as well as all creation. How then shall you who worship a tree, a worthless thing intended for burning, escape the eternal fire?” And they answered: “We have not just begun to do this, but have taken it from our fathers. All our requests are fulfilled by it, most of all rainfall, and much else. How can we do that which none has dared to do? For if someone were to dare this, he will then see death, and furthermore, we will not see rainfall until the end.” The Philosopher answered them: “God speaks of you in the Scriptures. How can you deny Him? For Isaiah cried out in the name of the Lord, saying: ‘Behold, I am coming to gather all nations and tongues; and they shall come, and see my glory. And I will set a sign among them, and I will send those that escape of

63

Isaiah

66:18-19

them unto the nations, to Tarshish, and to Pul and Lud and Mosoch, and to Tubal and Javan, and to Helladas, and to the isles afar off, that have not heard my name, and they shall declare my fame among the Gentiles.’ 85says the Lord Almighty. And again: ‘Behold, I will send many fishers and hunters, and they shall hunt you from the hills, and out of the holes of the rocks.’86 Brethren, know the God who created you. Behold the Gospel of God’s New Covenant in which you too were baptized.” And thus, having persuaded them with sweet words, he commanded them to cut down and burn the tree. Their elder bowed, came forth and kissed the Holy Gospel, as did all the others. Upon receiving white candles from the Philosopher, they walked toward the tree, chanting. And seizing an axe, Constantine struck the tree thirty-three times. Then he commanded all to chop and uproot it, and burn it. That very same night God sent rain and watered the earth. And with great rejoicing they praised God, and God rejoiced greatly over this. The Philosopher then went to the Imperial City. After see­ ing the Emperor, he took up residence in the Church of the Holy Apostles and prayed to God. In St. Sophia there was a chalice, the work of Solomon, made of precious stone. On it were inscribed words in Hebrew and Samaritan letters which none were able to read or explain. Taking it up, the Philosopher read and explained. It was as follows: “ Prophesy thusly the while, O star: Be a drink unto the Lord, the First-Born, during His vigil at night.” And after this, other words: “ For the Lord’s tasting of His creation from another tree, drink, be drunk with joy and cry out ‘Hallelujah!’ ” And after this, a third part: “ Behold the Prince, and the entire assembly shall see His glory and David among them.” And after this, a number was written: “Nine hundred and nine.” Calculating precisely, the Philosopher discovered that from the twelfth year of Solomon’s reign to the birth of Christ is nine hundred and nine years. This is a reckoning about Christ.87 While the Philosopher was rejoicing in God, yet another matter arose, and a task no less than the former. For Rastislav, the Prince of Moravia,88 through God’s admonition, took counsel with his Moravian princes and appealed to Emperor Michael, saying: “Though our people have rejected paganism and observe Christian law, we do not have a teacher who can explain to us in our lan­ guage the true Christian faith, so that other countries which look to us might emulate us. Therefore, O lord, send us such a bishop and teacher; for from you good law issues to all countries.” And having gathered his council, the Emperor summoned

65

Jeremiah 16:16

Constantine the Philosopher and had him listen to this matter. And he said: “ Philosopher, I know that you are weary, but it is necessary that you go there. For no one can attend to this matter like you.” And the Philosopher answered: “ Though I am weary and sick in body, I shall go there gladly if they have a script for their language.” Then the Emperor said to him: “ My grandfather and my father, and many others have sought this but did not find it. How then can I find it?” And the Philosopher answered: “Who can write a language on water and acquire for himself a heretic’s name?” 89 And together with his uncle,90 Bardas, the Emperor an­ swered him again: 91 “If you wish, God may give you this as He gives to everyone that asks without doubt, and opens to them that knock.” 92 The Philosopher went and, following his old habit, gave himself up to prayer together with his other associates. Hearing the prayer of His servants, God soon appeared to him. And imme­ diately Constantine composed letters and began to write the lan­ guage of the Gospel, that is: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” and so forth. The Emperor rejoiced, and together with his counsellors glorified God. And he sent Constantine with many gifts, after writing the following epistle to Rastislav: “ God, who will have all men come unto the knowledge of the truth and raise themselves to a greater station, having noted your faith and struggles, arranged now, in our time, to fulfdl your request and reveal a script for your language, which did not exist in the beginning but only in later times, so that you may be counted among the great nations that praise God in their own language. Therefore, we have sent you the one to whom God revealed this, a venerable and pious and very learned man, a philosopher. Thus, accept this gift which is greater and more valuable than all gold and silver, precious stones and transient riches. And strive zealously with him to strengthen his work, and with all your heart to seek God. And do not reject uni­ versal salvation. Convince all not to be idle, but to take the true path, so that, having led them to divine understanding through your struggles, you too shall receive your reward —both in this age and the next — for the souls of all who wish to believe in Christ our God now and evermore. Thus shall you leave your memory to future generations like the great Emperor Constantine.” 93 When Constantine arrived in Moravia, Rastislav received him with great honor. And he gathered students and gave them over to

67

John 1:1

I Tim 2:4

Constantine for instruction. As soon as all the church offices were accepted, 94he taught them Matins and the Hours, Vespers and the Compline, and the Liturgy. And according to the word of the pro­ phet, the ears of the deaf were unstopped, the Words of the Scrip­ tures were heard, and the tongues of stammerers spoke clearly.95 And God rejoiced over this, while the Devil was shamed. Because God’s Word was spreading, the evil envier from the days of creation, the thrice-accursed Devil, was unable to bear this good and entered his vessels. And he began to rouse many, saying to them: “ God is not glorified by this. For if this were pleasing unto Him, could He not have ordained from the beginning that they should glorify Him, writing their language in their own script? But only three languages, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, were chosen as appropriate for rendering glory unto God.” These were the cohorts of the Latins speaking, archpriests, priests, and their disciples.96 And having fought with them like David with the Philistines,97 Constantine defeated them with words from the Scriptures, and called them trilinguists, since Pilate had thus written the Lord’s title.98 And this was not all they were saying, but they also were teaching other impieties, saying: “ Underground live people with huge heads; and all reptiles are the creation of the Devil, and if one kills a snake, he will be absolved of nine sins because of this. If one kills a man, let him drink from a wooden cup for three months and not touch one of glass.” And they forbade neither the offering of sacrifices according to the ancient custom, nor shame­ ful marriages. Cutting all this down like thorns, Constantine burned them with the fire of Scripture, saying: “ Offer unto God a sacrifice of thanksgiving, and pay thy vows unto the Most High. Send not away the wife of thy youth. For if having begun to hate her, thou send her away, wickedness covers not thy lust, saith the Lord Almighty. And take heed to your spirit, and let none leave the wife of thy youth; and that which I hated ye have done, because the Lord hath been witness between thee and the wife of thy youth, whom thou hast forsaken: Yet is she thy companion and the wife of thy covenant.99 And in the Gospel the Lord says: ‘Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her al­ ready in his heart.’ And furthermore: ‘But I say unto you: That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornica­ tion, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced, committeth adultery.’ And the Apostle said: ‘What God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.’ ”

69

Psalm 50:14 Mala chi 2:14-15

Matthew 5 :27-28

Matthew 5:32

Matthew 19:6

Constantine spent forty months in Moravia, and then left to ordain his disciples. On the way Kocel,100 Prince of Pannonia, re­ ceived him and took a great liking to the Slavic letters. He learned them himself, and gave him about fifty students to be taught them. He rendered him great honor, and accompanied him. But Constantine took neither gold nor silver nor other things from either Rastislav or Kocel. He set down the word of the Gospel without sustenance, asked only for nine hundred captives, and released them. When he was in Venice, bishops, priests and monks gathered against him like ravens against a falcon. And they advanced the trilingual heresy, saying: “Tell us, O man, how is it that you now teach, having created letters for the Slavs, which none else have found before, neither the Apostle, nor the pope of Rome, nor Gregory the Theologian,101nor Jerome, nor Augustine? We know of only three languages worthy of praising God in the Scriptures, Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.” And the Philosopher answered them: “ Does not God’s rain fall upon all equally? And does not the sun shine also upon all? And do we not all breathe air in the same way? Are you not ashamed to mention only three tongues, and to command all other nations and tribes to be blind and deaf? Tell me, do you render God powerless, that He is incapable of granting this? Or envious, that He does not desire this? We know of numerous peoples who possess writing and render glory unto God, each in its own language. Surely these are obvious: Armenians, Persians, Abkhazians, Iberians, Sogdians, Goths, Avars, Turks, Khazars, Arabs, Egyptians, and many others.102 If you do not wish to understand this, at least recognize the judgment of the Scriptures. For David cries out, saying: ‘O sing unto the Lord, all the earth: sing unto the Lord a new song.’ And again: ‘Make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all the earth: make a loud noise, and rejoice, and sing praise.’ And likewise: ‘Let all the earth worship Thee, and sing unto Thee; let it sing to Thy name, God on High.’ And furthermore: ‘O praise the Lord, all ye nations: praise Him, all ye people. Let every thing that hath breath praise the Lord.’ And in the Gospel according to John it says: ‘But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the children of God.’ And again in the same Gospel: ‘Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe in Me through their word, that they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee.’ And Matthew said: ‘All power is given unto Me in heaven, and on earth. Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy

71

Psalm 96:1 Psalm 98:4 Psalm 66:4 Psalm 117:1 Psalm 150:6 John 1:12

John 17:20-21

Matthew 28:18-20

Ghost; Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of time. Amen.’ And Mark says again: ‘Go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues.’ And unto you also is said, teachers of the law: ‘Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suf­ fer ye them that are entering to go in.’ And furthermore: ‘Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in, ye hindered.’ And Paul said to the Corinthians: ‘I would that ye all spake with tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that prophesieth, than he that speaketh with tongues, except he inter­ pret, that the church may receive edifying. Now, brethren, if I come unto you, speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying, or by doctrine? And even things without life giving sound, whether pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare him­ self to the battle? So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. Therefore, if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh, a barbarian, and he that speak­ eth, shall be a barbarian unto me. Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the church. Wherefore, let him that speaketh in an unknown tongue, pray that he may interpret. For if I p^ay in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. Else, when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say, Amen, at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified. I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: Yet in church I had rather speak five words with my understand­ ing, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand

73

Mark 16:15-17

Matthew 23:13

Luke 11:52 I Cor. 14:5-40

words in an unknown tongue. Brethren, be not children in under­ standing: howbeit, in malice be ye children, but in understanding be men. In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hearme,saith the Lord. Wherefore, tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not; but proph­ esying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe. If therefore, the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad? But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one un­ learned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all: And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so, falling down on his face, he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth. How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church: and let him speak to himself, and to God. Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge. If any thing be revealed to another that sitteth by, let the first hold his peace. For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets. For God is not author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the church. What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be igno­ rant, let him be ignorant. Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy, and forbid not to speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently, and in order.’ And again he says: ‘And that every tongue should confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.’ Amen.” And with these words and many more, he shamed them and went away, leaving them. Upon learning of Constantine, the Pope of Rome sent for him. And when he came to Rome, the Apostolic Father himself, Ha-103 drian and all the townspeople came out to meet him, carrying

75

Phil. 2:11

candles. For he was carrying the relics of St. Clement the Martyr and Pope of Rome.104 And at once God wrought glorious miracles for his sake: a paralytic was healed, and many others were cured of various maladies. And even captives were at once liberated from the hands of their captors when they invoked Christ and St. Clement. Accepting the Slavic Scriptures, the Pope placed them in the Church of St. Mary called Phatne.105 And the holy liturgy was cele­ brated over them. Then the Pope commanded two bishops, Formosus and Gauderich,106to consecrate the Slavic disciples. And when they were consecrated they at once celebrated the liturgy in the Sla­ vic language in the Church of the Apostle Peter. And the next day they celebrated in the Church of St. Petronilla, and on the following day in the Church of St. Andrew. And then they celebrated the en­ tire night, glorifying God in Slavic once again in the Church of the Apostle Paul, the great universal teacher. And in the morning they again celebrated the liturgy over his blessed grave with the help of Bishop Arsenius, one of the seven bishops, and of Anastasius the librarian.107 The Philosopher and his disciples did not cease to render due praise unto God for this. And the Romans did not cease to come to him and question him. And if someone wished to ask about these things, they received double and triple explanations to their ques­ tions from him, and would joyfully return to their homes again. Then a certain Jew, who would come and debate with him, said to him once: “ Christ has not yet come according to the number of years when the One, of whom the prophets speak, shall be bom of a virgin.” Calculating for him all the years from Adam by generations, the Philosopher told him precisely that He has come, and the num­ ber of years from then till now. And having instructed him, he dismissed him. And his many labors overtook him, and he fell ill. Enduring his illness for many days, he once had a divine revelation and began to chant the following: “When they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord, my spirit rejoiced, and my heart was gladdened.” Having put on his venerable garments, he thus spent that entire day rejoicing and saying: “ Henceforth I am neither a ser­ vant of the Emperor nor of anyone else on earth, but only of God Almighty. I was not, and I came to be, and am forever. Amen.” On the following day he put on holy monastic dress and, receiving light to light,108 called himself Cyril. He spent fifty days in that dress.109 And when the hour to repose and remove to the eternal dwellings approached, he raised his arms to God and, in tears, prayed, saying thus: “ O Lord, my God, who hast created

77

Psalm 122:1

all the ranks of angels and incorporeal powers, stretched out the heavens and founded the earth, and brought all things into being from non-being, who hast always heeded those that work Thy will, fear Thee and keep Thy commandments, heed my prayer and preserve Thy faithful flock which Thou appointed to me, Thy useless and unworthy servant. Deliver them from the god­ less and heathen malice of those speaking blasphemy against Thee, and destroy the trilingual heresy belief. Increase Thy church to a multitude, gather all together in unanimity, and make a chosen people of those who are of one mind in Thy true faith and just confession. And inspire in their hearts the Word of Thy Son, for it is Thy gift. If Thou hast accepted us, unworthy ones, to preach the Gospel of Thy Christ, then those who are striving for good deeds and doing what pleases Thee, whom Thou hast given to me, I return to Thee as Thine. Guide them with Thy firm right hand and shelter them with the cover of Thy wings, so that all might praise and glorify Thy name, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.” He kissed everyone with a holy kiss and said: “Blessed be God, who hath not given us as prey into the teeth of our invisible enemies, but hath smashed their snare and saved us from their cor­ ruption.” And thus he reposed in the Lord at 42 years of age, on the 14th day of the month of February, of the second indiction, the 6370th year from the creation of this world.110 And the Apostolic Father commanded all Greeks residing in Rome, as well as Romans, to gather with candles, chant over him and join his funeral procession, as they would for the Pope himself. And this they did. Then Methodius, his brother, entreated the Apostolic Father saying: “Our mother adjured us that the one of us first to pass away be brought to his brother’s monastery to be buried there.” And the Pope commanded that he be put into a coffin and that it be nailed shut with iron nails. He kept him this way for seven days, preparing for the journey. But the Roman bishops said to the Apostolic Father: “Though he travelled through many lands, God led him here, and here He received his soul. Thus, it is proper that he be buried here as a venerable man.” Then the Apostolic Father said: “ For the sake of his saint­ liness and charity I shall transgress111 Roman custom and bury him in my tomb, in the Church of the Holy Apostle Peter.” And his brother said: “ Since you do not heed me and do not give him up, let him, if it pleases you, rest in the Church of St. Clement, for he came here with him.” And the Apostolic Father commanded that this be done. Gathering again with all the people who wished to join the proces-

79

Psalm 124:6

Translation of the Relics of St. Cyril to the Basilica of St. Clement in Rome (XI-century fresco)

sion of honor, the bishops said: “ Let us unnail the coffin and see whether anything has been taken from him.” 112 After much effort, they were unable to unnail the coffin, by God’s command. And thus they put him with the coffin into a tomb to the right of the altar in the Church of St. Clement,113 where many miracles began to occur. When the Romans saw these miracles, they became even more attached to his saintliness and honor. Painting his icon over the tomb, they began to light candles over it day and night and praise God, who thus glorifies those who glorify Him. Unto Him glory, honor, and reverence forever. Amen.

Notes to the Life of Constantine 1 The initial passage is a paraphrase from Paul’s first epistle to Timothy (I Tim. 2:4). In the Vitae of Constantine and Methodius the influence of the par­ ticular school of spirituality to which the author belonged is seen in the frequent use of scriptural quotations, paraphrases, and allusions. This is a common stylistic device in hagiographical writings. Cf. also Ezekiel 33:11. 2 The clause, “ and I call them by name,” is an emendation to the quoted passage from John 10:27. Cf. Revelation 2 1 :24. 3 During the first half of the ninth century the area of Thessalonica con­ stituted a Byzantine administrative division called a theme (thema). A theme was ruled by a strategos who possessed supreme power in both military and civilian matters. (See George Ostrogorsky, History o f the Byzantine State, 9 5 —97, 193—95.) Drungarios was the title of a highranking military officer. He was subordinate to the strategos. It is curious that the name of Constantine’s mother is not given. We assume, however, that it was Mary, the name by which she is called in later legends. 4 This passage paraphrases the Wisdom of Solomon 7:9, which reads: “ For she [wisdom] is more beautiful than the sun,...” 5 The reference to Placidas is perhaps best explained by summarizing the Legend o f Saint Eustathius. It is set during the reign of the Roman Em ­ peror Trajan (98 —117) and deals with Placidas, a wealthy nobleman and general widely known for his military prowess. Once while hunting deer, Placidas noticed a large stag standing at a distance and began to stalk it. Moving in for the kill, he discerned a cross and the figure of Christ in the stag’s antlers and heard a voice, questioning why he was stalking Christ whom he unconsciously revered. He fainted. When he came to his senses, he heard the same voice again, which now commanded him to be baptized with his wife and two sons and to return in order to learn of his fate. Taking

81

82

the name Eustathius, he is baptized and returns to the stag from which he learns that he will be tested severely, lose everything, but in the end gain glory. His tribulations begin at once. Plague descends upon his house and destroys his servants and livestock; his home is looted; he is separated from his wife and sons—his wife is taken away by a sea captain and his sons are carried off by wild beasts. Fifteen years hence, the Emperor dispatches men to search for Placidas, whom they find and recognize by a distinctive scar on the neck. Reinstated to his former position, he leads the Roman army to victory against the barbarians,is miraculously reunited with his wife and sons, and returns to Rome. To celebrate the victory, the Emperor wishes to make a sacrifice to Apollo, but Eustathius refuses, admitting that he is a Christian. For this he and his family are condemned to death and perish in a furnace. The unconsumed bodies of the martyrs are then buried with honor. The Greek and Latin texts of the Legend o f Saint Eustathius are in J.P. Migne, ed., Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Graeca, Vol. 105, cols. 375-418. For a discussion of the Legend, see Hippolyte Delahaye’s article, “ La Legende de Saint Eustachi,” Melanges D ’Hagiographie Grecque et Latine (Brussels, 1966), 212-39. It is difficult to say why the biographer compared Constantine to Placidas. Perhaps it was because both heroes were party to incidents which occurred during a hunt and marked an important turning point in the life of each. Placidas rejected paganism and was converted to Christianity, i.e., to a new way of life, while Constantine rejected mun­ dane pleasures and began to contemplate the vanity of this life. Both became committed to Christ, Placidas through a stag, Constantine through a falcon. However, it is curious that the hagiographer should draw an analogy for his spiritual hero from a myth based on a popular Greek secular tale. 6 Saint Gregory of Nazianzus (7 3 3 0 -3 9 5 ) earned the appellation “ Theo­ logian” after delivering five discourses on the Trinity. He is considered one of the founding fathers of the Eastern Church. Under his leadership Orthodoxy prevailed over the Arian heresy (see notes 26 and 27 to the Vita of Methodius). Perhaps it was his poetic works which inspired Con­ stantine to compose his eulogy. 7 Logothete was an important administrative post corresponding to a modern-day member of the cabinet. Theoctistus was the Logothete of the Drome under Empress Theodora who ruled from 8 4 2 -8 5 6 in place of her underaged son, Emperor Michael III. There is an obvious ana­ chronism in the biographer’s assertion that Constantine was sent for in order to study with the Emperor, since in 842, the year Constantine arrived in Constantinople, Michael was three years old. Perhaps they had the same teachers. For the sake of clarity, the name Constantine is inserted at times for the third-person singular pronoun. 8 The clause, “ so that I might understand what is Thy will and be saved,” is an emendation of the quoted passage from the Wisdom of Solomon 9:5 and Psalm 116:16. At the beginning of this quotation the Slavic

text substitutes “ our” for “ my,” viz.: “ 0 God of our fathers” instead of “ 0 God of my fathers” (see Wisdom of Solomon 9:1). 9 The traditional Slavic name for Constantinople was cesar’ grad”, which translated verbatim means the Imperial City. 10 It is clear from other manuscripts of the Vita that the form diacice is a distortion of the word dialektika (dialectics). Indeed, the distortion of foreign words is one of the most frequently encountered errors in medie­ val texts. 11 Leo was the Archbishop of Thessalonica. After the defeat of the icono­ clastic movement (842), he came to Constantinople where he gained the appellation “ Mathematician” and a teaching position in the church. In fact his fame as a mathematician spread beyond the borders of Byzan­ tium, for it is reported that Caliph Mamun invited Leo to visit Bagdad. When Emperor Michael III came to power (856), his uncle Bardas reorganized the Imperial University and placed Leo at its head. Photius was a brilliant scholar and theologian. He became Patriarch of Constantinople after Ignatius was deposed and held this position from 858—867 and again from 878—886. The biographer is able to lend weight to his statements concerning Constantine’s genius by mentioning that as a young man he studied with Leo and Photius. The studies mentioned here usually made up the curriculum of the trivium and quadrivium of medieval schools. 12 The personal pronoun and verb “ He conferred” are omitted in the ori­ ginal. The correction was made on the basis of other manuscripts of the Vita (see Lavrov, Material}’, p. 42). 13 The phrase ot kr’stila izex ’ (I took out of the font) seems to be a circum­ locution meaning “ be godparent to ” or “ sponsor at baptism.” The Logothete apparently was a eunuch and had no children of his own. 14 The meaning of this statement is not entirely clear. Of what honor and wealth is Constantine speaking? Perhaps he is referring to regaining Paradise after the expulsion of Adam and Eve. This assumption is based on Constantine’s subsequent reply to the Khazars concerning his rank, “ Though I have sought my forefather’s former station, I have not suc­ ceeded in obtaining it, for I am Adam’s scion” (see p. ). Thus, “ honor and wealth” perhaps symbolizes the state of grace before Original Sin. 15 This statement is inaccurate historically because the Emperor Theophilus died in 842. The Logothete undoubtedly spoke with Empress Theodora (see note 7). It is possible, however, that this “ inaccuracy” is the result of a scribal error —perhaps due to an unclear abbreviation — since other manuscripts of the Vita have Empress (cesarica) instead of Emperor {cesar'). 16 The Narrow Sea (Uskoe more) seems to be the Slavic circumlocution for strait. Indeed, Constantine had left for the Bosporus. The Greek word translates literally as “ ox ford” and is derived from the mythological tale about Io, who crossed the Bosporus of Thrace in the form of a heifer. It is possible that Constantine hid at the Kleidion Monastery, where the iconoclast patriarch John was later imprisoned.

83

17 John VII, known as John Grammaticus, was Patriarch of Constantinople from 837—843. He was a confirmed iconoclast and played an important role in composing the acts of the Synod of 815, which repudiated the Second Council of Nicaea (787) and accepted the decision of the icono­ clast council of 754. As a result icons were ordered destroyed. John was also tutor to Theophilus who became emperor and an ardent icono­ clast. However, after Theophilus’ death, his wife Theodora and her supporters, Logothete Theoctistus and Bardas (see note 7), deposed John and restored the veneration of icons. John was exiled to a monas­ tery on the Bosporus. Dvornik has pointed out that the disputations between John and the youthful Constantine may be imaginative, since there was still a strong iconoclastic movement in Constantinople and it is unlikely that they would be given an opportunity to defend their position in a debate (see F. Dvornik, “ The Patriarch Photius and Iconoclase,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 7 [1953], 69—97). However, there are others (Vasica et al) who feel that this disputation is a faithful echo of such an event, and similar “ echoes” are found in Byzantine literature dating from the time of the iconoclastic controversy. 18 It is not clear which Nestor is being referred to. The passage seems to allude to the figure of Nestor mentioned in the Odyssey and Illiad, who in his old age exhorted young warriors to battle. However, it is also possible that it may refer to the Christian martyr Nestor, of whom mention if made in the Life o f Demetrius (see Note 74 in the Vita of Methodius). Here Nestor engages and defeats in single combat the gladia­ tor Lyacus (see Dvornik,Byzantine Missions, 340-41). 19 This passage alludes to Exodus 20:4, which reads: “ Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.” 20 As used by the Christians, Hagarite is a pejorative designation for the ancestors of Hagar,the Arab peoples. According to the Bible (Gen. 1 6 :2 15; 21:2 —14), Sarah was barren and Abraham lay with her slave woman Hagar, who bore him a son, Ishmael. However, after Sarah bore Isaac, Hagar and Ishmael were driven out. Thus, Hagarites are also outcasts. The term “ Saracens” is of unknown origin. It was another medieval designation for the Arabs as well as for all others who professed Islam. By the ninth century the Arabs had succeeded in whittling away extensive portions of the Byzantine Empire and were advancing toward Sicily. Apart from their military campaigns, they also waged a polemical war against basic Christian doctrines, especially the Trinity, which caused considerable concern in Constantinople about Christians living under Arab rule. This resulted in a proliferation of apologetical literature directed against Islam, an echo of which is found here. 21 According to I Samuel 17:40, David “ chose him five smooth stones out of the brook...” In the present context the three stones are meant appar­ ently to symbolize the Trinity. 22 The translation of this passage follows a correction suggested by Dummler

23

24

25

26

27

28

and Miklosich, i.e., instead of Priposlase ze s” nim ” assigkrita i Georgia polasu, translate Pristavise ze k ” nemn asikrita Georgija i poslase ja (see E. Dummler and F. Miklosich,Die Legende vom hi. Cyrillus [Vienna, 1870], p. 217). The exact meaning of this passage as recorded in the manuscript is unclear because of the word polasu. It is obvious from the above correction that his word was not considered a proper noun. On the other hand, Dvornik in his book Les Legendes de Constantin et de Methode, Vues de Byzance (Prague, 1933), 93 —97, viewed as similar the words polasa (?) and polaca (palatine), and concluded that a palatine, perhaps Photius himself, may also have taken part in the mission to the Arabs. However, Dvornik rejected this interpretation in a later reprint of this volume (Hattiesburg, 1969, xiv) as well as in another work, Byzan­ tine Missions Among the Slavs: SS Constantine-Cyril and Methodius (New Brunswick, 1970), p. 287, where this passage is translated: “ They attached to him the asecrete George and sent them.” Since the word polasa has never been attested, it is possible that it resulted from a scribal error or interpretation. This passage consists primarily of paraphrases from Matthew 5:39 and 44, and Luke 6:29. However, the opening words, “ Pray for,” is a Slavic emendation. In both Matthew 5:44 and Luke 6:27 we read: “ Love your enemies...” Constantine is referring to the fact that Greek culture nurtured other cultures, since it was one of the first to develop the various arts. Besides, the Arabs themselves emulated the Greeks: they studied Greek philo­ sophy,mathematics,science, and medicine,and copied Greek architecture. The form amerumnin is evidently a corruption of the Arabic appellation for the caliph, amir al-m u’ minin, or “ commander of the faithful.” This title was first accepted by Omar II (717 —720) and its usage was continued by subsequent caliphs. At the time of Constantine’s mission to the Arabs the reigning caliph was A1-Mutawakkil (847—861). He was intolerant of other religions and persecuted Jew and Christian alike. For example, he is known to have forced Jews and Christians to live within pales and adopt distinctive dress (see The Encyclopaedia o f Islam (London, 1963), III, p.786. This is not a verbatim quotation from Mark 16:18, which reads: “ And if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them.” The attempt on Constantine’s life indicates that the mission was a failure. This contention is supported by the fact that there was a war between the Greeks and Arabs from 851—853. Judging by another manuscript of the Vita (cf. Lvov) where instead of nadezdg v ”zlagae (place hope) we find pedal’ v ”zmetae (cast care), this pasaage seems to allude to I Peter 5:7, which reads: “ Casting all your cares upon Him; for He careth for you.” (See Lavrov, Materialy, p. 48.) The allusion here is to Exodus 16:2-15. The political upheaval of 856 gave Bardas (see Note 91) control of the government after the Empress Theodora was removed from the throne and forced into a convent, and the Logothete Theoctistus—Constantine’s friend—was murdered.

85

86

Perhaps this occasioned his withdrawal into solitude and apparent financial difficulties. 29 Mount Olympus was one of the many monasteries in Bithynia, located in the inaccessible mountainous districts of northwest Asia Minor. Such monasteries were referred to as “ Holy Mountains,” and were important religious centers for Byzantium. 30 The Khazars were a Turkic people who lived north of the Caucasus Mountains in the region between the Azov and Caspian Seas. Little is known about them. They are first mentioned in sixth-century historical works and thought to stem from the East Turkic people, the Uigurs, who migrated westward and settled in Eastern Europe around the fifth century. There they founded the Khazar Empire which lasted for several centuries before being overrun by the Russians (see D.M. Dunlop, The History o f the Jewish Khazars [Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1954]). It is generally assumed that Khazar royalty converted to Judaism around the year 800. However, they did not force their religion on their subjects and tolerated a variety of religions. As concerns Constantine’s missionary work, no historical corroboration of his mission to Khazaria has been found. Nevertheless, there is little reason to doubt the possibility of such a trip, even though the epistle from the Khazars to Michael III can hardly be considered authentic. It is most unlikely that the Khazars would admit to having shameful customs, or that the Jews would be engaged in converting the Khazars at that particular time (ca. 860), since Judaism had already been accepted. Perhaps the biographer was aware of accounts dealing with the disputations preceding the conversion to Judaism of Khazar royalty and simply embellished his own work with a similar occurrence. In fact the tradition of religious disputations at the Khazar court is well attested. A rather detailed account of such a disputation is given by the Spaniard Bakri (see Dunlop, p. 90). Since religious disputa­ tions were common in Khazaria, the author of the Vita may be describing what actually took place in a confrontation between a Christian, Jew, and Muslim. Additional information concerning the Khazars can be found in Imra Boba’s Nomads, Northmen and Slavs (The Hague, 1967), and in M. I. Artamanov’s Istorija Xazar (Leningrad, 1962). 31 Constantine’s words allude to Matthew 1 0 :9 -1 0 : “Provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass, in your purses; nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, neither shoes, nor yet staves.” 32 Constantine undoubtedly would have been interested in learning Hebrew before confronting the Khazars. The grammar which he translated con­ sisted only of eight parts. The reference is probably to a translation of a Hebrew grammar into Greek. 33 There are a number of theories concerning the actual meaning of this passage, but opinions remain divided. When the Vita was first published by Dobrovsky, scholars were rather surprised by the statement that Constantine found Scriptures written in “ Russian letters.” To accept it as valid would have necessitated a complete reassessment of Russian linguistic history, since it would mean that the Russians had an ortho­ graphy preceding and independent of either the Glagolitic or Cyrillic

scripts. It would also mean that there were Christian converts among the Russians—who convered to Christianity in 988—before the Moravian mission. Thus, scholars began to question the meaning of the enigmatic phrase “ Russian letters.” One of the earliest hypotheses had Gothic as the possible point of reference. However, the French Slavist Andre Vaillant refuted the Gothic interpretation by noting that Constantine referred to the Goths (G otfy) while in Vienna. Indeed, why should the biographer refer to the Goths by two different names (see “ Les ‘Letires Russes’ de la Vie de Constantin,” Revue des Etudes Slaves, XV [1935], 75-77). Vaillant in turn advanced his own theory, explaining that the “ letters” were Syriac, a name which was simply inverted to Russian by a copyist: cf. the roots sur’/ rus’ in the words sur’s kimi (Syriac) and rus’skimi (Russian). This theory was rejected by the Russian historian George Vernadsky who suggested instead that the Russians may have adopted Armenian or Georgian script to their language. He argued that according to the Vita, Constantine acquired the language in question quickly and compared it to his own, i.e., the Slavic dialect spoken in Thessalonica. This would explain why he was able to converse with the man who spoke Russian but still had to study the writings (see Ancient Russia [New Haven, 1943], 347-50). Subsequently the eminent Slavist Roman Jakobson (see “ Saint Constantin et la Langue Syriaque,” Annuaire de Vlnstitut de Philologie et d ’H istoire Orientates et Slaves, VII [1939—1944], 181-86) accepted Vaillant’s hypothesis and reinforced it by indicating another work in which this inversion is found. Thus, in a twelfth-century Bulgarian copy of Khabr’s treatise, “ On Russian Letters,” the word Asyrrian (assur-) is replaced by Russian (rus-) (see Lavrov, p. 165). Furthermore, in a prologue version of the Vita of Constantine, the fact is mentioned that Constantine knew four languages—Greek, Latin, Syriac, and Hebrew (see Lavrov, p. 101). More recently another American Slavist Horace Lunt pointed out still another example of the inversion sur’sk- to rus’s k- in the First Chronicle o f Novgorod (see “ Again the rus skymi pismeni,” Cercetari de lingvistica, III [1958], 324-26). It is interesting to note that the authors of the two standard reference sources on Constantine and Methodius, Franz Grivec, Konstantin und Method: Lehrer der Slaven, and Francis Dvornik, Byzantine Missions Among the Slavs, accept the Syriac hypothesis. However, it has not been accepted by a number of East European Slavic scholars. The Bulgarian Slavist Emil Georgiev believes the form rus’skimi pismeni is correct as it stands and does not necessitate further theorizing on other linguistic possibilities (see Kiril i Metodij, osnovopoloznici na slavianskite literaturi [Sofia, 1956], 60-62). The Polish Slavist Tadeusz Lehr-Spfawinski favors the Gothic hypothesis but considers Emil Georgiev’s theory pos­ sible (see Zyw oty Konstantyna iMetodego [Poznan, 1959]). The Russian Slavist V.A. Istrin rejects all hypotheses which argue in favor of an inversion. He points out that all the extant copies of the Vita contain

87

88

the expression “ Russian letters.” Istrin’s major argument for accepting the text as it stands is based on historical sources. He sees nothing surprising in the possibility that there were Russian converts to Christ­ ianity living in the Kherson area before the Moravian mission. Moreover, he points out that neither Gothic nor Syriac are mentioned in the Vita as languages which Constantine knew. In fact he finds the Syriac hypo­ thesis most objectionable because this language, in his opinion, cannot be connected with the Crimea of that time. Finally, he finds it hard to believe that Constantine would be interested in Syriac Scriptures, since the Syrian Church was largely heretical. Constantine’s interest in “ Rus­ sian letters” can be explained as resulting from his knowledge of a second Slavic language. Consequently Istrin accepts Georgiev’s view that the Gospels and Psalter were written in an early Slavic script which is no longer extant. To bolster his argument, he introduces several historical sources including the Russian Chronicles (see 1100 let slavjanskoj azbuki [Moscow, 1963]). In the present work the phrase is translated as it is found in the manuscript. 34 According to his Life (circa 5th century) St. Clement, the Pope of Rome, died a martyr’s death in the Crimea. Thus was engendered a tradition concerning St. Clement that became well known in the East and West. And when Constantine made his discovery on 30 January 861, he sin­ cerely believed that he had found his relics. However, the author of the Vita confused Clement with another saint, and the entire tradition is legendary. 35 Dvornik points out that the relics of St. Clement were thought to be hidden in the ruins of a church on a small island near Kherson (see Byzantine Missions, 66—67). 36 Constantine wrote a work entitled Discourse on the Discovery and Translation o f the Relics o f Saint Clement. The main source of informa­ tion about the Discourse is a letter written by Anastasius, who was personally acquainted with Constantine in Rome, to Gauderich, Bishop of Velletri (see note 105). In the letter Anastasius speaks of Clement’s martyrdom and mentions Constantine’s work, which he translated from Greek into Latin (see Monumenta Germaniae historica: Epistolae, VII, 435-38). Curiously the Slavic and Latin translations of the Discourse have survived but the original has been lost. Unfortunately the Slavic text, which presumably was translated from the Greek, is very difficult to decipher. Indeed, it would be nearly unintelligible if not for the Latin translation. In this regard, the renowned Slavist Nicholas Van Wijk con­ cluded that the unintelligibility of the Slavic text was largely due to the translator’s lack of skill and poor knowledge of Slavic (see “ Ojazyke na prenesenie moscej sv. Klimenta,” Byzantinoslavica, I [1929], 10-15). The Latin and Slavic texts of the Discourse can be found in J. Vasica’s “ Slovo na prenesenie mostem preslavnego Klimenta neboli legenda Chersonska,” Acta Academiae Velehradensis, XIX (1948), 38-80. Because of the lexical information contained in the Discourse, Van Wijk

believes that it represents one of the earliest Slavic translations. 37 The Church Slavic form of the word for Hungarians